e10vk
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2007
|
or
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the transition period
from to
|
Commission file number 0-26946
INTEVAC, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
94-3125814
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
3560 Bassett Street
Santa Clara, California 95054
(Address of principal executive
office, including Zip Code)
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
(408) 986-9888
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
Common Stock ($0.001 par value)
|
|
The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (NASDAQ Global Select)
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None.
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. o Yes þ No
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. o Yes þ No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. þ Yes o No
Indicate by a check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated
filer o
|
|
Accelerated
filer þ
|
|
Non-accelerated
filer o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
Smaller reporting
company o
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the
Act). o Yes þ No
The aggregate market value of voting stock held by
non-affiliates of the Registrant, as of June 30, 2007 was
approximately $356,923,914 (based on the closing price for
shares of the Registrants Common Stock as reported by the
Nasdaq Stock Market for the last trading day prior to that
date). Shares of Common Stock held by each executive officer,
director, and holder of 5% or more of the outstanding Common
Stock have been excluded in that such persons may be deemed to
be affiliates. This determination of affiliate status is not
necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.
On March 7, 2008, 21,676,698 shares of the
Registrants Common Stock, $0.001 par value, were
outstanding.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE.
Portions of the Registrants Proxy Statement for the 2008
Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference
into Part III. Such proxy statement will be filed within
120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Except for historical information contained in this
Form 10-K,
certain statements set forth herein, including statements
regarding growth in industry shipments of hard disk drives;
trends in semiconductor manufacturing equipment including line
width dimensions, wafer size and market size; timing of shipment
and revenue recognition for our new semiconductor equipment
products; projected growth in Imaging Instrumentation product
sales as a percentage of Imaging Instrumentation revenues;
timing of volume production for our night-vision sensor modules
for rifle sights and our
LIVAR®
cameras; the expectation that a significant portion of our
revenue will continue to be concentrated with a small number of
international customers; continued government and internal
funding for development of Digital Enhanced Night Vision
Goggles; the estimated cost of compliance with environmental
regulations; projected reduction in new 200
Lean®
shipments in 2008 relative to 2007; expected fluctuations in our
quarterly and annual revenues and operating margins; and our
expectation that we will continue to retain our earnings, rather
then paying dividends are forward- looking statements that are
dependant on certain risks and uncertainties including such
factors, among others, as hard disk drive industry conditions;
our ability to forecast and meet the equipment needs of
semiconductor manufacturers and deliver our Lean Etch systems as
planned; our ability to design and market new Imaging
Instrumentation products and sell increasing levels of those
products to military and commercial customers; our ability to
continue to raise external funding and provide internal funding
for development of our Imaging Instrumentation products; our
ability to maintain compliance with environmental regulations on
a cost-effective basis; our ability to cost-effectively manage
significant fluctuations in our business levels from quarter to
quarter and other factors described below. Therefore, actual
outcomes and result may differ materially from what is expressed
or forecast in such forward-looking statements. Words such as
expect, anticipate, intend,
plan, believe, seek,
estimate and variations of such words and similar
expressions are intended to identify such forward looking
statements. See Risk Factors in the
Business section of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for a more thorough list of potential risks and
uncertainties.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
Overview
Intevacs business consists of two reportable segments:
Equipment: Intevac is a leader in the design,
manufacture and marketing of high-productivity lean
manufacturing systems and has been producing Lean
Thinking platforms since 1994. We are the leading supplier
of magnetic media sputtering equipment to the hard disk drive
industry and offer leading-edge, high-productivity etch systems
to the semiconductor industry.
Imaging Instrumentation: Intevac is a leader
in the development of compact, cost-effective, high-sensitivity
digital-optical products for the capture and display of
low-light images and the optical analysis of materials. We
provide sensors, cameras and systems for commercial applications
in the inspection, medical, scientific and security industries
and for government applications such as night vision and
long-range target identification.
Intevac was incorporated in October 1990 in California and
completed a leveraged buyout of a number of divisions of Varian
Associates in February 1991. Intevac was reincorporated in
Delaware in 2007. Our principal executive offices are located at
3560 Bassett Street, Santa Clara, California 95054, and our
phone number is
(408) 986-9888.
Equipment
Segment
Hard
Disk Drive Equipment Market
We design, manufacture, market and service complex capital
equipment used to deposit, or sputter, thin films of material
onto magnetic disks that are used in hard disk drives, and also
equipment to lubricate these disks. Disk and disk drive
manufacturers produce magnetic disks in a sophisticated
manufacturing process involving many steps, including plating,
annealing, polishing, texturing, sputtering and lubrication. We
believe our systems represent approximately 60% of the installed
capacity of disk sputtering systems worldwide. Our systems are
used by manufacturers such as Fuji Electric, Hitachi Global
Storage Technologies, Seagate Technology and Western Digital.
1
Hard disk drives are a primary storage medium for digital data
and are used in products and applications such as personal
computers, enterprise data storage, streaming video, personal
audio and video players and video game platforms. We believe
that hard disk drive shipments will continue to grow, driven by
these products, by other new and emerging applications, by the
proliferation of personal computers into emerging markets in
Asia and Eastern Europe and by technology advances in the
industry. As a result of these and other factors, TrendFocus has
projected that hard disk drive unit shipments will increase from
435 million units in 2006 to 785 million units in
2011, equivalent to a 12.5% cumulative annual growth rate.
Continued growth in hard disk drive shipments is a key factor in
determining demand for magnetic disks used in hard disk drives.
TrendFocus also has projected that unit shipments of magnetic
disks for hard disk drives will increase from 786 million
units in 2006 to 1.2 billion units in 2011, equivalent to a
9.3% cumulative annual growth rate.
Demand for our disk manufacturing products is driven by a number
of factors, including demand for hard disk drives, market share,
the average number of magnetic disks used in each hard drive,
utilization and productivity of disk manufacturers
installed base of magnetic disk manufacturing equipment, and
obsolescence of the installed base as new recording technologies
are introduced. The introduction of perpendicular recording
technology by disk manufacturers in recent years had a
significant impact on the equipment market, and has increased
demand both for new equipment, such as our 200
Lean®
disk sputtering system, and for technology upgrades to the
installed base of our legacy MDP-250 systems. However, in 2007,
relative to 2006, shipments of new systems declined, while
technology upgrades became a larger percentage of our Equipment
revenues.
Hard
Disk Drive Equipment Products
Disk
Sputtering Systems
The 200 Lean is our latest generation disk sputtering system.
The first 200 Lean shipped in late 2003, and the installed base
totaled 110 systems as of the end of 2007. We believe
approximately 90% of these systems are used in production, and
the balance are used in research and development. The 200 Lean
was designed to provide enhanced capabilities relative to our
MDP-250 system and to lower overall cost of ownership for disk
manufacturers. The 200 Lean provides higher disk throughput
from a smaller footprint, which enables more disks to be
manufactured per square-foot of factory floor space. The 200
Leans modular architecture enables our customers to
incorporate any number of disk manufacturing process steps
required by their evolving technology roadmaps. Most 200 Leans
have been delivered with the capability to perform up to 20
process steps versus the 12 process step maximum on the MDP-250.
The 200 Lean also allows rapid reconfiguration to accommodate
varying process recipes, disk sizes and disk materials.
We shipped approximately 110 of our previous generation MDP-250
disk sputtering systems from 1994 through 2005. We believe
approximately 65% of these systems were still being used for
production as of the end of 2007 and that the balance were in
storage, in use in research and development or permanently
retired from service.
Disk
Lubrication Systems
Disk lubrication is the manufacturing step that immediately
follows deposition of magnetic films. During lubrication, a
microscopic layer of lubricant is applied to the disks
surface to improve durability and reduce surface friction
between the disk and the read/write head assembly.
The Intevac
AccuLubertm
disk lubrication system lubricates disks by depositing a thin
film of lubricant on the disk while it is under vacuum. This
eliminates the use of large amounts of solvents during the
lubrication process, which are environmentally hazardous and are
expensive to procure, store and dispose of. The AccuLubers
vapor process capability creates a uniform lubricant coating,
and two lubricating process chambers provide high throughput and
redundancy. The first AccuLuber was shipped and accepted by the
customer during 2007, and production units are expected to begin
shipping in 2008.
The Intevac DLS-100 disk lubrication system provides our
customers with an alternate lubrication process by dipping disks
into a lubricant/solvent mixture. Intevac has been manufacturing
dip lubrication systems similar to the DLS-100 since 1996.
2
Non-Systems
Business
We also provide installation, maintenance and repair services,
technology upgrades, spare parts and consumables to our system
customers. An increased level of technology upgrades caused
non-systems business to increase significantly from 2006 to
2007, both in absolute terms and as a percentage of Equipment
revenues.
Semiconductor
Equipment Market
A wide range of manufacturing equipment is used to fabricate
semiconductor chips including: atomic layer deposition
(ALD), chemical vapor deposition (CVD),
physical vapor deposition (PVD), electrochemical
plating (ECP), etch, ion implantation, rapid thermal
processing (RTP), chemical mechanical planarization
(CMP), wafer wet cleaning, wafer metrology and inspection, and
systems that etch, measure and inspect circuit patterns on masks
used in the photolithography process.
Most chips are built on a silicon wafer base and include a
variety of circuit components, such as transistors and other
devices, that are connected by multiple layers of wiring
(interconnects). To build a chip, the transistors, capacitors
and other circuit components are first created on the surface of
the wafer by performing a series of processes to deposit and
selectively remove successive film layers. Similar processes are
then used to build the layers of wiring structures on the wafer.
Most chips are currently fabricated using 65 nanometer (nm) and
larger linewidth dimensions. Over time, we believe the 45 nm,
and then 32 nm, are likely to be the next line width
nodes to be implemented as manufacturers work to
squeeze more and more components onto each chip. As the density
of the circuit components increases to enable greater computing
power in the same or smaller area, the complexity of building
the chip also increases, necessitating more process steps to
form smaller structures and more intricate wiring schemes.
Over time, the semiconductor industry has also migrated to
increasingly larger wafers to build chips. The predominant wafer
size used for volume production today is 200 millimeter (mm), or
eight-inch, wafers, but a substantial number of advanced
fabrications now use 300mm, or
12-inch,
wafers to gain the economic advantages of a larger surface area.
The majority of new fabrication capacity is 300mm.
We are utilizing our expertise in the design, manufacturing,
marketing and support of complex manufacturing equipment and the
prior experience of our management team in the semiconductor
manufacturing equipment business to develop products for the
semiconductor manufacturing market, which we believe is
substantially larger than the hard disk drive equipment market
that we currently serve.
Semiconductor
Manufacturing Products
We announced our new etch semiconductor manufacturing system,
the Lean
Etchtm,
during 2007. The Lean Etch is a 300 mm system designed to
address the need for significant productivity improvement and
provide enabling etch technology at 45 nanometer nodes and
below. We plan to deliver evaluation systems to customers during
2008 and begin production shipments during 2009. We do not
expect to recognize any revenue from Lean Etch shipments until
2009.
Imaging
Instrumentation Segment
Imaging
Instrumentation Market
We develop, manufacture and sell compact, cost-effective,
high-sensitivity digital-optical products for the capture and
display of low-light images and the optical analysis of
materials. We provide sensors, cameras and systems for
commercial applications in the inspection, medical, scientific
and security industries and for government applications such as
night vision and long-range target identification. The majority
of our imaging revenue has historically been derived from
contracts related to the development of electro-optical sensors,
cameras and systems and funded by the U.S. Government, its
agencies and contractors. However, the percentage of Imaging
Instrumentation revenue derived from product sales grew from 15%
in 2006 to 27% in 2007 and is expected to continue to increase
in 2008.
3
Imaging
Instrumentation Products
Raman Spectrometers On January 31, 2007,
we completed an acquisition of the assets and certain
liabilities of DeltaNu, LLC, a Laramie, Wyoming company that
pioneered development of miniature Raman spectrometer systems.
Raman spectrometer systems are used to identify materials by
illuminating the material with a laser and measuring the
characteristic spectrum of light scattered from the material.
The process enables real-time, non-destructive identification of
liquids and solids outside of the laboratory, and is well suited
to applications such as hazmat, forensics, homeland security,
geology, gemology, medical, pharmaceutical and industrial
quality assurance. DeltaNus products include the Advantage
Series of low-cost, high-performance bench-top spectrometers,
the Inspector series of hand-held field analysis spectrometers,
the
ExamineRtm
high-performance Raman microscope, and a new series of
near-infrared Raman instruments which incorporate our core
technology in near-infrared sensors into the Advantage and
ExamineR product lines.
Near Infrared Cameras Our
MOSIR®
line of cameras provide previously unavailable high sensitivity
in the near infrared portion of the spectrum and are well suited
for low-light spectroscopy, physical science, life science and
industrial applications within the commercial imaging market.
Near-Eye Display Systems On November 9,
2007, we completed an acquisition of the assets and certain
liabilities of Creative Display Systems, LLC, (CDS)
a Carlsbad, California company that specializes in
high-performance, micro-display products for near-eye and
portable viewing of video in defense and commercial markets.
CDSs portfolio of intellectual property includes key
patent applications relating to CDSs innovative
eyeglass-mounted display systems, which provide high definition
and a wide
field-of-view
in miniaturized light-weight and portable designs.
Low-Light Cameras Our CMOS-based cameras
include our
NightVista®
line of day/night digital video cameras for low light level
surveillance applications and our
MicroVista®
line of cameras for microscopy, medical imaging, and inspection
applications between wavelengths of 200 and 1100 nanometers.
Night Vision Rifle Sights In 2007, we
completed development and began pilot production of night vision
sensor modules for use in a digital rifle-sight system by the
military of a NATO country. We expect to begin volume production
deliveries during 2008.
Head Mounted Night Vision Systems The
U.S. military has funded development of various night
vision technologies at multiple companies, which has evolved to
todays widely deployed Generation-III night
vision tubes. The U.S. military is now funding development
of a compact head mounted digital imaging system, or Digital
Enhanced Night Vision Goggle (DENVG). DENVG
integrates a visible imager, an infrared imager and a video
display. This approach allows low light and infrared imagery to
be viewed individually, or to be overlaid (digitally
fused), and also enables connectivity to a wireless
network for distribution of the imagery and other information.
The U.S. Army plans to begin production of this type of
system in 2011. During 2007, we completed joint development,
with DRS Technologies, Inc. (DRS), of a prototype
DENVG night vision goggle for the U.S. Army. The prototype used
our low-light night vision sensors in combination with a DRS
thermal imaging sensor. We have delivered multiple prototype
units and have completed extensive field testing with the Army.
We expect to continue funded development of DENVG technology
during 2008, and we expect to deliver enhanced-performance
prototypes for field testing within the year.
Long-Range Target Identification Current
long-range military nighttime surveillance systems are based on
expensive thermal imaging camera systems. These systems are
relatively large, which is a disadvantage for airborne and
portable applications. Accordingly, there is a need for a
cost-effective, compact, long-range imaging solution that
identifies targets at a distance greater than an
adversarys detection range capability. Our Laser
Illuminated Viewing and Ranging
(LIVAR®)
system can be used to identify targets at distances of up to
twenty kilometers and has been incorporated into
U.S. weapons development programs, such as the Airborne
Laser, the Cost Effective Targeting System, and the Long-Range
Identification System programs. We expect to deliver
pre-production LIVAR cameras for both land-based and airborne
applications during 2008, and we expect initial production
deliveries to commence in late 2008.
Intensified Photodiodes We have developed,
under a number of research and development contracts,
intensified photodiode technology that enables single photon
detection at extremely high data rates, which is designed for
use in target identification and other military applications.
4
Backlog
Our backlog of orders at December 31, 2007 was
$34.2 million, as compared to a December 31, 2006
backlog of $125.0 million. The $34.2 million of
backlog at December 31, 2007 consisted of
$28.4 million of Equipment backlog and $5.8 million of
Imaging Instrumentation backlog. The $125.0 million of
backlog at December 31, 2006 consisted of
$119.4 million of Equipment backlog and $5.6 million
of Imaging Instrumentation backlog. The decrease in Equipment
backlog was primarily the result of reduced orders for 200 Lean
disk sputtering systems. Backlog at December 31, 2007
includes two 200 Lean systems, as compared to twenty-four 200
Lean systems in backlog at December 31, 2006. Backlog
includes only customer orders with scheduled delivery dates that
are not subject to any customer contingencies.
Customer
Concentration
Historically, a significant portion of our revenue in any
particular period has been attributable to sales to a small
number of customers. In 2007, Seagate; Matsubo, our Japanese
equipment distributor; Fuji Electric and Hitachi Global Storage
Technology each accounted for more than 10% of our revenues, and
in aggregate accounted for 90% of revenues. In 2006, Seagate,
Matsubo, and Hitachi Global Storage Technology each accounted
for more than 10% of our revenues, and in aggregate accounted
for 93% of revenues. In 2005, Seagate, Matsubo, Hitachi Global
Storage Technology and Maxtor each accounted for more than 10%
of our revenues, and in aggregate accounted for 90% of revenues.
We expect that sales of our products to relatively few customers
will continue to account for a high percentage of our revenues
in the foreseeable future.
Foreign sales accounted for 82% of revenue in 2007, 90% of
revenue in 2006 and 71% of revenues in 2005. The majority of our
foreign sales are to companies in Asia or to U.S. companies
for use in their Asian manufacturing or development operations.
We anticipate that sales to these international customers will
continue to be a significant portion of our Equipment revenues.
Our disk sputtering equipment customers include magnetic disk
manufacturers, such as Fuji Electric, and vertically integrated
hard disk drive manufacturers, such as Hitachi Global Storage
Technology and Seagate. Our customers manufacturing
facilities are primarily located in California, China, Japan,
Malaysia and Singapore.
Our Equipment customers businesses tend to be cyclical,
with their peak sales occurring during the second half of the
year. As a result, our customers have a tendency to order
equipment for delivery and installation by midyear, so that they
have new capacity in place for their peak production period.
However, while this pattern applied during 2007, during both
2005 and 2006 our customers were capacity constrained, demand
did not follow normal seasonal patterns, and we realized our
highest revenues during the fourth fiscal quarter.
Competition
The principal competitive factors affecting the markets for our
equipment products include price, product performance and
functionality, ease of integration, customer support and
service, reputation and reliability. We have historically
experienced intense competition worldwide for magnetic disk
sputtering equipment from competitors including Anelva
Corporation, Ulvac and Oerlikon, (formerly Unaxis Holdings,
Ltd.), each of which has sold substantial numbers of systems
worldwide. In addition, as we enter the semiconductor equipment
market, we anticipate that we will experience competition from
competitors such as Applied Materials, LAM Research and Tokyo
Electron, Ltd. Our Equipment competitors all have substantially
greater financial, technical, marketing, manufacturing and other
resources than we do. There can be no assurance that any of our
competitors will not develop enhancements to, or future
generations of, competitive products that offer superior price
or performance features, or that new competitors will not enter
our markets and develop such enhanced products.
The principal competitive factors affecting our Imaging
Instrumentation products include price, extreme low light level
sensitivity, power consumption, resolution, size, ease of
integration, reliability, reputation and customer support and
service. We face substantial competition for our Imaging
Instrumentation products, and many of our competitors have
greater resources than we do. In the military market, ITT
Industries, Inc. and Northrop Grumman Corporation, who are large
and well-established defense contractors, are the primary
U.S. manufacturers of image intensifier tubes used in
Generation-III night vision devices and their derivative
products. Our low-light digital cameras are intended to displace
Generation-III night vision based products. We expect that ITT,
Northrop
5
Grumman, BAE and other companies will develop digital night
vision products and aggressively promote their sales.
Furthermore, CMC Electronics, DRS, FLIR Systems and Raytheon
manufacture cooled infrared sensors and cameras which are
presently used in long-range target identification systems, and
with which our LIVAR target identification sensors and cameras
compete. In the commercial markets, companies such as Andor,
E2V, Goodrich, Hamamatsu, Texas Instruments and Roper Scientific
offer competitive sensor and camera products, and companies such
as Ahura, B&W Tek, Horiba Jobin Yvon,
InPhotonics, Ocean Optics, Renishaw and Smiths Detection offer
competitive portable Raman spectrometer products.
Marketing
and Sales
Equipment sales are made through our direct sales force, with
the exception of in Japan and Malaysia, where we sell our
products through our distributor, Matsubo. The selling process
for our Equipment products is multi-level and long-term,
involving individuals from marketing, engineering, operations,
customer service and senior management. The process involves
making sample disks or wafers for the prospective customer and
responding to their needs for moderate levels of machine
customization. Customers often require a significant number of
product presentations and demonstrations before making a
purchasing decision.
Installing and integrating new equipment requires a substantial
investment by a customer. Sales of our systems depend, in
significant part, upon the decision of a prospective customer to
replace obsolete equipment or to increase manufacturing capacity
by upgrading or expanding existing manufacturing facilities or
by constructing new manufacturing facilities, all of which
typically involve a significant capital commitment. After making
a decision to select our equipment, our customers typically
purchase one or more engineering systems to develop and qualify
their production process prior to ordering and taking delivery
of multiple production systems. Accordingly, our systems have a
lengthy sales cycle, during which we may expend substantial
funds and management time and effort with no assurance that a
sale will result.
The production of large complex systems requires us to make
significant investments in inventory both to fulfill customer
orders and to maintain adequate supplies of spare parts to
service previously shipped systems. In some cases we manufacture
subsystems
and/or
complete systems prior to receipt of a customer order to smooth
our production flow
and/or
reduce our lead time. We maintain inventories of spare parts in
California, Singapore and Shenzhen, China to support our
customers. We often require our customers to pay for systems in
three installments, with a portion of the system price billed
upon receipt of an order, a portion of the price billed upon
shipment, and the balance of the price and any sales tax due
upon completing installation and acceptance of the system at the
customers factory. All customer product payments are
recorded as customer advances, which are released into revenue
in accordance with our revenue recognition policy.
We provide process and applications support, customer training,
installation,
start-up
assistance and emergency service support to our equipment
customers. We conduct training classes for our customers
process engineers, machine operators and machine service
personnel. Additional training is also given to our customers
during equipment installation. We have field offices in
Singapore, China, Korea, Malaysia and Japan to support our
customers in Asia. We generally add additional support centers
as necessary to maintain close proximity to our customers
factories as they deploy our systems.
Warranty for our equipment typically ranges between 12 and
24 months from customer acceptance. During this warranty
period any necessary non-consumable parts are supplied and
installed without charge. Our employees provide field service
support in the United States, Singapore, Malaysia, China and
Japan. In Japan, field service support is also supplemented by
our distributor, Matsubo.
Sales of our Imaging Instrumentation products for military
applications are primarily made to the end user through our
direct sales force. In cases where our products are enabling
technology for more complex systems, we also sell to leading
defense contractors such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin Corporation,
Northrop Grumman Corporation, Raytheon, DRS Technologies and
Sagem.
We are subject to long sales cycles in our Imaging
Instrumentation segment because many of our products, such as
our night vision systems, typically must be designed into our
customers products, which are often complex and
state-of-the-art.
These development cycles are often multi-year, and our sales are
contingent on our customer successfully integrating our product
into its product, completing development of its product and then
obtaining
6
production orders for its product. Sales of these products are
also often dependent on ongoing funding of defense programs by
the U.S. government and its allies. Additionally, sales to
international customers are subject to issuance of export
licenses by the United States government, which cannot always be
obtained.
Sales of our commercial Imaging Instrumentation products are
made through a combination of direct sales, system integrators,
distributors and value added resellers and can also be subject
to long sales cycles.
Imaging Instrumentation generally invoices its research and
development customers either as costs are incurred, or as
program milestones are achieved, depending upon the particular
contract terms. As a government contractor, we invoice customers
using estimated annual rates approved by the Defense Contracts
Audit Agency (DCAA). A majority of our contracts are
Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) contracts. On any CPFF
contract, 15% of the fee is withheld pending completion of the
program and DCAAs annual audit of our actual rates. The
withheld portion of the fee is included in revenue and in
unbilled accounts receivable until paid.
Research
and Development and Intellectual Property
Our long-term growth strategy requires continued development of
new products. We work closely with our global customers to
design products that meet their planned technical and production
requirements. Product development and engineering organizations
are located primarily in the United States and Singapore.
We invested $40.1 million (18.6% of net sales) for fiscal
2007, $30.0 million (11.6% of net sales) for fiscal 2006,
and $14.4 million (10.5% of net sales) for fiscal 2005 for
product development and engineering programs to create new
products and to improve existing technologies and products. We
have spent an average of 15.0% of net sales on product
development and engineering over the last five years.
We believe our competitive position significantly depends on our
research, development, engineering, manufacturing and marketing
capabilities, and not just on our patent position. However,
protection of Intevacs technological assets by obtaining
and enforcing intellectual property rights, including patents,
is important. Therefore, our practice is to file patent
applications in the United States and other countries for
inventions that we consider important. We have a substantial
number of patents in the United States and other countries, and
additional applications are pending for new inventions. Although
we do not consider our business materially dependent upon any
one patent, the rights of Intevac and the products made and sold
under our patents along with other intellectual property,
including trademarks, know-how, trade secrets and copyrights,
taken as a whole, are a significant element of our business.
We enter into patent and technology licensing agreements with
other companies when management determines that it is in our
best interest to do so. We pay royalties under existing patent
license agreements for use, in several of our products, of
certain patented technologies. We also receive, from time to
time, royalties from licenses granted to third parties.
Royalties received from or paid to third parties have not been,
and are not expected to be, material to our consolidated results
of operations.
In the normal course of business, we periodically receive and
make inquiries regarding possible patent infringement. In
dealing with such inquiries, it may be necessary or useful for
us to obtain or grant licenses or other rights. However, there
can be no assurance that such licenses or rights will be
available to us on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. If
we are not able to resolve or settle claims, obtain necessary
licenses
and/or
successfully prosecute or defend our position, our business,
financial condition and results of operations could be
materially and adversely effected.
Manufacturing
We manufacture our Equipment products at our facilities in
California and Singapore. Our Equipment manufacturing operations
include electromechanical assembly, mechanical and vacuum
assembly, fabrication of sputter sources, and system assembly,
alignment and testing. We make extensive use of the local
supplier infrastructure serving the semiconductor equipment
business. We purchase vacuum pumps, valves, instrumentation and
fittings, power supplies, printed wiring board assemblies,
computers and control circuitry, and custom mechanical parts
made by forging, machining and welding. We also have our own
small fabrication center that supports our engineering
departments and makes some of the machined parts used in our
products.
7
We manufacture our Imaging Instrumentation products at our
facilities in California and Wyoming. Imaging Instrumentation
manufacturing includes production of advanced photo-cathodes and
sensors, lasers, cameras, integrated camera systems, compact
Raman spectrometry instruments and micro-displays. We make
extensive use of advanced manufacturing techniques and
equipment, and our operations include vacuum, electromechanical
and optical system assembly. We make use of the supplier
infrastructure serving the semiconductor, camera and optics
manufacturing industries. In manufacturing our sensors, we
purchase wafers, components, processing supplies and chemicals.
In manufacturing our camera systems, we purchase printed circuit
boards, electromechanical components and assemblies, mechanical
components and enclosures, optical components and computers.
Employees
At December 31, 2007, we had 480 employees, including
38 contract employees. Of these 480 employees, 141 were in
research and development, 228 in operations, and 111 in
administration, customer support and marketing. Of the
480 employees, 338 were in the Equipment segment, 101 were
in the Imaging Instrumentation segment, and 41 were in Corporate.
Compliance
with Environmental Regulations
We are subject to a variety of governmental regulations relating
to the use, storage, discharge, handling, emission, generation,
manufacture, treatment and disposal of toxic or otherwise
hazardous substances, chemicals, materials or waste. We treat
the cost of complying with government regulations and operating
a safe workplace as a normal cost of business and allocate the
cost of these activities to all functions, except where the cost
can be isolated and charged to a specific function. The
environmental standards and regulations promulgated by
government agencies in Santa Clara, California, Fremont,
California and Singapore are rigorous and set a high standard of
compliance. We believe our costs of compliance with these
regulations and standards are comparable to other companies
operating similar facilities in Santa Clara, California,
Fremont, California and Singapore.
Executive
Officers of the Registrant
Certain information about our executive officers as of
March 14, 2008 is listed below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Age
|
|
Position
|
|
Executive Officers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Norman H. Pond
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
Chairman of the Board
|
Kevin Fairbairn
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer
|
Jeffrey Andreson
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
Vice President, Finance and Administration, Chief Financial
Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
|
Michael Barnes
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Vice President and Chief Technical Officer
|
Kimberly Burk
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
Sr. Director, Human Resources
|
Ralph Kerns
|
|
|
61
|
|
|
Vice President, Business Development, Equipment Products
|
Luke Marusiak
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
Chief Operating Officer
|
Joseph Pietras
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
Vice President and General Manager, Imaging Instrumentation
|
Other Key Officers:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Verle Aebi
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
Chief Technology Officer, Imaging Instrumentation
|
James Birt
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
Vice President, Customer Support, Equipment Products
|
Terry Bluck
|
|
|
48
|
|
|
Vice President, Technology, Equipment Products
|
Jerry Carollo
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
Vice President and General Manager, Creative Display Systems
|
Keith Carron
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
Managing Director and General Manager, DeltaNu
|
Timothy Justyn
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
Vice President, Manufacturing, Equipment Products
|
Dave Kelly
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
Vice President, Engineering, Imaging Instrumentation
|
8
Mr. Pond is a founder of Intevac and has served as
Chairman of the Board since February 1991. Mr. Pond served
as President and Chief Executive Officer from February 1991
until July 2000 and again from September 2001 through January
2002. Mr. Pond holds a BS in physics from the University of
Missouri at Rolla and an MS in physics from the University of
California at Los Angeles.
Mr. Fairbairn joined Intevac as President and Chief
Executive Officer in January 2002 and was appointed a director
in February 2002. Before joining Intevac, Mr. Fairbairn was
employed by Applied Materials from July 1985 to January 2002,
most recently as Vice-President and General Manager of the
Conductor Etch Organization with responsibility for the Silicon
and Metal Etch Divisions. From 1996 to 1999, Mr. Fairbairn
was General Manager of Applied Materials Plasma Enhanced
Chemical Vapor Deposition Business Unit and from 1993 to 1996,
he was General Manager of Applied Materials Plasma Silane
CVD Product Business Unit. Mr. Fairbairn holds an MA in
engineering sciences from Cambridge University.
Mr. Andreson joined Intevac in June 2007 and has
served as Vice President, Finance and Administration, Chief
Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary since August 2007.
Before joining Intevac Mr. Andreson served as managing
director and controller of Applied Materials, Inc.s Global
Services product group. Since joining Applied Materials in 1995,
Mr. Andreson held a number of senior financial positions,
including managing director, Global Financial Planning and
Analysis; Controller, Metron subsidiary; controller, North
American Sales and Service; and Controller, Volume
Manufacturing. From 1989 through 1995, Mr. Andreson held
various roles at Measurex Corporation. Mr. Andreson holds
an M.B.A. from Santa Clara University and a B.S. in Finance
from San Jose State University.
Dr. Barnes joined Intevac as Vice President and
Chief Technical Officer in February 2006. Before joining
Intevac, Dr. Barnes was General Manager of the High Density
Plasma Chemical Vapor Deposition Business Unit at Novellus
Systems from March 2004 to February 2006. From January 2004 to
March 2004, he was Vice President, Technology at Nanosys, and
from August 2003 to January 2004, he was Vice President,
Engineering at OnWafer Technologies. Dr. Barnes was
employed by Applied Materials from April 1998 to August 2003,
first as a Managing Director and subsequently as Vice President,
Etch Engineering and Technology. Dr. Barnes holds a BS, MS
and PhD in electrical engineering from the University of
Michigan.
Ms. Burk has served as Human Resources Director
since May 2000. Prior to joining Intevac, Ms. Burk served
as Human Resources Manager of Moen, Inc. from 1999 to 2000 and
as Human Resources Manager of Lawson Mardon from 1994 to 1999.
Ms. Burk holds a BS in sociology from Northern Illinois
University.
Mr. Kerns joined Intevac as Vice President, Business
Development of the Equipment Products Division in August 2003.
Before joining Intevac, Mr. Kerns was employed by Applied
Materials from April 1997 to November 2002, most recently as
Managing Director for Business Development for the Process
Modules Group. Previously, Mr. Kerns was General Manager of
Applied Materials Metal Etch Division from 2000 to 2002.
From 1998 to 2000, Mr. Kerns was Senior Director for
Applied Materials North America Multinational Accounts,
and from 1997 to 1998, he was General Manager of Applied
Materials Dielectric Etch Division. Mr. Kerns holds a
BS in chemistry from the University of Idaho and a PhD in
theoretical chemistry from Princeton University.
Mr. Marusiak joined Intevac as Chief Operating
Officer in April 2004. Before joining Intevac, Mr. Marusiak
was employed by Applied Materials from July 1991 to April 2004,
most recently as Senior Director of North American Operations.
Previously, Mr. Marusiak managed Applied Materials
Field Operations in North America. Mr. Marusiak holds a BS
in electrical engineering from Gannon University and an MS in
teleprocessing science from the University of Southern
Mississippi.
Mr. Pietras joined Intevac as Vice President and
General Manager of the Imaging Instrumentation Business in
August 2006. Before joining Intevac, Mr. Pietras was
employed by the Sarnoff Corporation from March 2005 to July 2006
as General Manager of Sarnoff Imaging Systems. From September
1998 to March 2005, he was employed by Roper Scientific as Vice
President, Operations. Mr. Pietras holds a BS in Physics
from the Stevens Institute of Technology and a MA and PhD in
Physics from Columbia University.
Mr. Aebi has served as Chief Technology Officer of
our Imaging Instrumentation business since August 2006.
Previously, Mr. Aebi served as President of the Photonics
Division from July 2000 to July 2006 and as General Manager of
the Photonics Division since May 1995. Mr. Aebi was elected
as a Vice President of the Company in
9
September 1995. From 1988 through 1994, Mr. Aebi was the
Engineering Manager of the night vision business we acquired
from Varian Associates in 1991, where he was responsible for new
product development in the areas of advanced photocathodes and
image intensifiers. Mr. Aebi holds a BS in physics and an
MS in electrical engineering from Stanford University.
Mr. Birt joined Intevac as Vice President, Customer
Support of the Equipment Products Division in September 2004.
Before joining Intevac, Mr. Birt was employed by Applied
Materials from July 1992 to September 2004, most recently as
Director, Field Operations/Quality North America. Mr. Birt
holds a BS in electrical engineering from Texas A&M
University.
Mr. Bluck rejoined Intevac as Vice President,
Technology of the Equipment Products Division in August 2004.
Mr. Bluck had previously worked at Intevac from December
1996 to November 2002 in various engineering positions. The
business unit Mr. Bluck worked for was sold to Photon
Dynamics in November 2002, and he was employed there as Vice
President, Rapid Thermal Process Product Engineering until
August 2004. Mr. Bluck holds a BS in physics from
San Jose State University.
Mr. Carollo joined Intevac in November 2007 as Vice
President and General Manager of Intevacs Creative Display
Systems subsidiary. Prior to joining Intevac, Mr. Carollo
was founder, president and CEO of Creative Display Systems.
Prior to founding Creative Display Systems Mr. Carollo
worked for Rockwell-Collins Optronics Electro-Optics from 1993
to 2006 where his most recent position was General Manager.
Mr. Corollo holds numerous patents in the area of optics,
display systems and optical communications, a MS in Optics from
the University of Rochester and a BS in Physics from the State
University of New York.
Dr. Carron joined Intevac in January 2007 as
Managing Director and General Manager of Intevacs DeltaNu,
Inc. subsidiary. Prior to joining Intevac, Dr. Carron was
the CEO of DeltaNu, LLC from March 2002 until January 2007.
Dr. Carron was also a professor of Chemistry at the
University of Wyoming from 1988 to 2006. Dr. Carron holds a
BA in Chemistry from Washington University and a PhD in
Chemistry from Northwestern University.
Mr. Justyn has served as Vice President, Equipment
Manufacturing since April 1997. Mr. Justyn joined Intevac
in February 1991 and has served in various roles in our
Equipment Products Division and our former night vision
business. Mr. Justyn holds a BS in chemical engineering
from the University of California, Santa Barbara.
Mr. Kelly joined Intevac in December 2006 as Vice
President, Engineering of the Imaging Instrumentation business.
Before joining Intevac, Mr. Kelly was employed by Redlake
MASD LLC, a division of Roper Industries from January 2004 to
December 2006, most recently as Vice President, Engineering and
Custom Service. From November 2000 to December 2003, he was
employed by Fast Technology AG as Vice President, Engineering.
Mr. Kelly holds a BS and a MS in mechanical engineering
from the University of Michigan.
Available
Information
Our annual report on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K,
and amendments to such reports are available, free of charge, on
or through our Internet home page as soon as reasonably
practicable after we electronically file such material with, or
furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission. The
public may also read and copy any materials we file with the SEC
at the SECs Public Reference Room at
100 F Street, N.E., Washington D.C. 20549. The public
may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference
Room by calling the SEC at
1-800-SEC-0330.
The SEC also maintains an Internet website (www.sec.gov)
that contains reports, proxy and information statements and
other information regarding us that we file electronically with
the SEC. Our Internet home page is located at
www.intevac.com; however, the information in, or that can
be accessed through, our home page is not part of this report.
Trade
Marks
200 Lean®,
AccuLuberTM,
ExaminerRTM,
Lean
Etchtm,
LIVAR®,
MicroVista®
,
NightVista®
and
MOSIR®,
among others, are our trademarks.
10
Demand
for capital equipment is cyclical, which subjects our business
to long periods of depressed revenues interspersed with periods
of unusually high revenues.
Our Equipment business sells equipment to capital-intensive
industries, which sell commodity products such as disk drives
and semiconductors. When demand for these commodity products
exceeds capacity, demand for new capital equipment such as ours
tends to be amplified. Conversely, when supply of these
commodity products exceeds demand, the demand for new capital
equipment such as ours tends to be depressed. For example, the
hard disk drive industry has been historically subject to
multi-year cycles because of the long lead times and high costs
involved in adding capacity, and to seasonal cycles driven by
consumer purchasing patterns, which tend to be heaviest in the
third and fourth quarters of each year.
The cyclical nature of the capital equipment industry means that
in some years we will have unusually high sales of new systems,
and that in other years our sales of new systems will be
severely depressed. The timing, length and volatility of these
cycles are difficult to predict. These cycles have affected the
timing and amounts of our customers capital equipment
purchases and investments in new technology. For example, sales
of systems for magnetic disk production were severely depressed
from mid-1998 until mid-2003 and grew rapidly from 2004 through
2006. The number of new systems delivered or scheduled for
delivery in the second half of 2007 was significantly lower than
the number of systems delivered in the first half of the year,
and we are projecting that new system shipments will be
significantly lower in 2008 than 2007. We cannot predict with
any certainty when these cycles will begin or end.
If
demand for hard disk drives does not continue to grow and our
customers do not replace or upgrade their installed base of disk
sputtering systems, then future sales of our disk sputtering
systems will suffer.
From mid-1998 until mid-2003, there was very little demand for
new disk sputtering systems, as magnetic disk manufacturers were
burdened with over-capacity and were not investing in new disk
sputtering equipment. By 2003, however, over-capacity had
diminished, and orders for our 200 Lean began to increase. From
2004 through the end of 2006, there was strong demand for new
disk sputtering systems.
Sales of our equipment for capacity expansions are dependent on
the capacity expansion plans of our customers and upon whether
our customers select our equipment for their capacity
expansions. We have no control over our customers
expansion plans, and we cannot be sure that they will select our
equipment if they do expand their capacity. Our customers may
not implement capacity expansion plans, or we may fail to win
orders for equipment for those capacity expansions, which could
have a material adverse effect on our business and our operating
results. In addition, some manufacturers may choose to purchase
used systems from other manufacturers or customers rather than
purchasing new systems from us.
Sales of our 200 Lean disk sputtering systems are also dependent
on obsolescence and replacement of the installed base of disk
sputtering equipment. If technological advancements are
developed that extend the useful life of the installed base of
systems, then sales of our 200 Lean will be limited to the
capacity expansion needs of our customers, which would
significantly decrease our revenue. For example, during 2007
some of our customers decided to use legacy systems for the
production of first generation perpendicular media, which
delayed the replacement of such legacy systems with new 200 Lean
systems.
Our customers have experienced competition from companies that
produce alternative storage technologies like flash memory,
where increased capacity, improving cost, lower power
consumption and performance ruggedness have resulted in
competition with lower capacity, smaller form factor disk drives
in handheld applications. While this competition has
traditionally been in the markets for handheld consumer
electronics applications like personal media players, these
competitors have recently announced products for notebook and
enterprise computer applications. If alternative technologies,
such as flash memory, replace hard disk drives as a primary
method of digital storage, then demand for our products would
likely decrease.
We are
exposed to risks associated with a highly concentrated customer
base.
Historically, a significant portion of our revenue in any
particular period has been attributable to sales of our disk
sputtering systems to a limited number of customers. In 2007,
one of our customers accounted for 31% of our
11
revenues, and four customers in the aggregate accounted for 90%
of our revenues. The same four customers, in the aggregate,
accounted for 31% of our net accounts receivable at
December 31, 2007. During 2006, Seagate acquired Maxtor,
and in June 2007, Western Digital announced the acquisition of
Komag. This consolidation in the industry limits the number of
potential customers for our products. Orders from a relatively
limited number of magnetic disk manufacturers have accounted
for, and likely will continue to account for, a substantial
portion of our revenues. The loss of, or delays in purchasing
by, any one of our large customers would significantly reduce
potential future revenues. In addition, the concentration of our
customer base may enable customers to demand pricing and other
terms unfavorable to us, and makes us more vulnerable to any
changes in demand by a given customer. Furthermore, the
concentration of customers can lead to extreme variability in
revenue and financial results from period to period. For
example, during 2007 revenues ranged between $76.4 million
in the first quarter and $16.8 million in the fourth
quarter.
Our
operating results fluctuate significantly from quarter to
quarter, which may cause the price of our stock to
decline.
Over the last eight quarters, our revenues per quarter have
fluctuated between $16.8 million and $95.9 million.
Over the same period our operating income (loss) as a percentage
of revenues has fluctuated between approximately 23% and (42%)
of revenues. We anticipate that our revenues and operating
margins will continue to fluctuate. We expect this fluctuation
to continue for a variety of reasons, including:
|
|
|
|
|
changes in the demand, due to seasonality, cyclicality and other
factors in the markets, for computer systems, storage subsystems
and consumer electronics containing disks our customers produce
with our systems;
|
|
|
|
delays or problems in the introduction and acceptance of our new
products, or delivery of existing products;
|
|
|
|
timing of orders, acceptance of new systems by our customers or
cancellation of those orders; and
|
|
|
|
new products, services or technological innovations by our
competitors or us.
|
Additionally, because our systems are priced in the millions of
dollars and we sell a relatively small number of systems, we
believe that
quarter-to-quarter
comparisons of our revenues and operating results may not be an
accurate indicator of our future performance. Our operating
results in one or more future quarters may fail to meet the
expectations of investment research analysts or investors, which
could cause an immediate and significant decline in the trading
price of our common shares.
Our
long-term revenue growth is dependent on new products. If these
new products are not successful, then our results of operations
will be adversely affected.
We have invested heavily, and continue to invest, in the
development of new products, especially our new Lean Etch
system. Our success in developing and selling new products
depends upon a variety of factors, including our ability to
predict future customer requirements accurately, technological
advances, total cost of ownership of our systems, our
introduction of new products on schedule, our ability to
manufacture our products cost-effectively and the performance of
our products in the field. Our new product decisions and
development commitments must anticipate continuously evolving
industry requirements significantly in advance of sales.
The majority of our revenues in both fiscal 2007 and fiscal 2006
were from sales of our 200 Lean disk sputtering system and
related parts and services. The 200 Lean was first delivered in
December 2003. When first introduced, advanced vacuum
manufacturing equipment, such as the 200 Lean, is subject to
extensive customer acceptance tests after installation at the
customers factory. These acceptance tests are designed to
validate reliable operation to specifications in areas such as
throughput, vacuum level, robotics, process performance and
software features and functionality. These tests are generally
more comprehensive for new systems than for mature systems, and
are designed to highlight problems encountered with early
versions of the equipment. For example, initial builds of the
200 Lean experienced high production and warranty costs in
comparison to our more established product lines. Failure to
promptly address any of the problems uncovered in these tests
could have adverse effects on our business, including
rescheduling of backlog, failure to achieve customer acceptance
and therefore revenue recognition as anticipated, unanticipated
product rework and warranty costs, penalties for
non-performance, cancellation of orders, or return of products
for credit.
12
We are making a substantial investment to develop our new Lean
Etch system for semiconductor manufacturing. We spent a
substantial portion of our research and development costs on
this new product in 2006 and increased our level of spending on
this project in 2007. We may experience problems with the Lean
Etch similar to the startup problems encountered with the 200
Lean. Moreover, we have not developed or sold products for this
market previously. Failure to correctly assess the size of the
market, to successfully develop a cost effective product to
address the market, or to establish effective sales and support
of the new product would have a material adverse effect on our
future revenues and profits, and could include loss of our
entire investment in the project.
We are jointly developing a next generation head mounted
night-vision system with another defense contractor. This system
is planned for sale to the U.S. military and will compete
with head-mounted systems developed by our competitors. The
U.S. military does not intend to initiate production of
this system until 2011. We plan to make a significant investment
in this type of product and cannot be assured when, or if, we
will be awarded any production contracts for these night vision
systems.
We have developed a night-vision sensor and camera module for
use in a NATO customers digital rifle-sight system. We
cannot guarantee that we will achieve the yield improvements and
cost reductions necessary for this program to be successful.
Shipments under this program are subject to export approval by
the U.S. government.
Products based on our LIVAR target identification and low light
level camera technologies are designed to offer significantly
improved capability to military customers. We are also
developing commercial products in our Imaging Instrumentation
business. None of our Imaging Instrumentation products are
currently being manufactured in high volume, and we may
encounter unforeseen difficulties when we commence volume
production of these products. Our Imaging Instrumentation
business will require substantial further investment in sales
and marketing, in product development and in additional
production facilities in order to expand our operations. We may
not succeed in these activities or generate significant sales of
these new products. In 2007, sales of our Imaging
Instrumentation products were $5.2 million out of a total
of $19.1 million of Imaging Instrumentation revenues.
Failure of any of these new products to perform as intended, to
penetrate their markets and develop into profitable product
lines or to achieve their production cost objectives would have
a material adverse effect on our business.
Our
sales cycle is long and unpredictable, which requires us to
incur high sales and marketing expenses with no assurance that a
sale will result.
The sales cycle for our Equipment systems can be a year or
longer, involving individuals from many different areas of our
company and numerous product presentations and demonstrations
for our prospective customers. Our sales process for these
systems also commonly includes production of samples,
customization of our product and installation of evaluation
systems in the factories of our prospective customers. We do not
enter into long-term contracts with our customers, and therefore
until an order is actually submitted by a customer there is no
binding commitment to purchase our systems.
Our Imaging Instrumentation business is also subject to long
sales cycles because many of our products, such as our LIVAR
system, often must be designed into our customers
products, which are often complex
state-of-the-art
products. These development cycles are often multi-year, and our
sales are contingent on our customers successfully integrating
our product into their product, completing development of their
product and then obtaining production orders for their product
from the U.S. government or its allies.
As a result, we may not recognize revenue from our products for
extended periods of time after we have completed development and
made initial shipments of our products, during which time we may
expend substantial funds and management time and effort with no
assurance that a sale will result.
We
operate in an intensely competitive marketplace, and our
competitors have greater resources than we do.
In the market for our disk sputtering systems, we have
experienced competition from competitors such as Anelva
Corporation, which is a subsidiary of Canon, and Oerlikon, each
of which has sold substantial numbers of systems worldwide. In
the market for semiconductor equipment, we expect to experience
competition from competitors such
13
as Applied Materials, LAM Research and Tokyo Electron, Ltd. In
the market for our military Imaging Instrumentation products, we
experience competition from companies such as ITT Industries,
Inc., Northrop Grumman Corporation and BAE. In the markets for
our commercial Imaging Instrumentation products, we compete with
companies such as Andor, E2V, Hamamatsu, Texas Instruments and
Roper Scientific for sensor and camera products, and with
companies such as Ahura, B&W Tek, Horiba Jobin
Yvon, InPhotonics, Ocean Optics, Renishaw, and Smiths Detection
for portable Raman spectrometer products. Our competitors have
substantially greater financial, technical, marketing,
manufacturing and other resources than we do, especially in the
semiconductor equipment market where we have not previously
offered a product. We cannot assure you that our competitors
will not develop enhancements to, or future generations of,
competitive products that offer superior price or performance
features. Likewise, we cannot assure you that new competitors
will not enter our markets and develop such enhanced products.
Moreover, competition for our customers is intense, and our
competitors have historically offered substantial pricing
concessions and incentives to attract our customers or retain
their existing customers.
We may
not be successful in maintaining and obtaining the necessary
export licenses to conduct operations abroad, and the United
States government may prevent proposed sales to foreign
customers.
Many of our Imaging Instrumentation products require export
licenses from United States Government agencies under the Export
Administration Act, the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, the
Arms Export Act of 1976 and the International Traffic in Arms
Regulations. This limits the potential market for our products.
We can give no assurance that we will be successful in obtaining
all the licenses necessary to export our products. Recently,
heightened government scrutiny of export licenses for products
in our market has resulted in lengthened review periods for our
license applications. Export to countries which are not
considered by the United States Government to be allies is
likely to be prohibited, and even sales to U.S. allies may
be limited. Failure to obtain, delays in obtaining, or
revocation of previously issued licenses would prevent us from
selling our products outside the United States, may subject us
to fines or other penalties, and would have a material adverse
effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations.
Our
products are complex, constantly evolving and often must be
customized to individual customer requirements.
The systems we manufacture and sell in our Equipment business
have a large number of components and are complex, which
requires us to make substantial investments in research and
development. This is especially true with the new Lean Etch
system. If we were to fail to develop, manufacture and market
new systems or to enhance existing systems, that failure would
have an adverse effect on our business. We may experience delays
and technical and manufacturing difficulties in future
introduction, volume production and acceptance of new systems or
enhancements. In addition, some of the systems that we
manufacture must be customized to meet individual customer site
or operating requirements. In some cases, we market and commit
to deliver new systems, modules and components with advanced
features and capabilities that we are still in the process of
designing. We have limited manufacturing capacity and
engineering resources and may be unable to complete the
development, manufacture and shipment of these products, or to
meet the required technical specifications for these products,
in a timely manner. Failure to deliver these products on time,
or failure to deliver products that perform to all contractually
committed specifications, could have adverse effects on our
business, including rescheduling of backlog, failure to achieve
customer acceptance and therefore revenue recognition as
anticipated, unanticipated rework and warranty costs, penalties
for non-performance, cancellation of orders, or return of
products for credit. In addition, we may incur substantial
unanticipated costs early in a products life cycle, such
as increased engineering, manufacturing, installation and
support costs, that we may be unable to pass on to the customer
and that may affect our gross margins. Sometimes we work closely
with our customers to develop new features and products. In
connection with these transactions, we sometimes offer a period
of exclusivity to these customers.
Our
Imaging Instrumentation business depends heavily on government
contracts, which are subject to immediate termination and are
funded in increments. The termination of or failure to fund one
or more of these contracts could have a negative impact on our
operations.
We sell many of our Imaging Instrumentation products and
services directly to the U.S. government, as well as to
prime contractors for various U.S. government programs. Our
revenues from government contracts totaled
14
$14.1 million, $10.2 million, and $6.9 million in
2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. Generally, government
contracts are subject to oversight audits by government
representatives and contain provisions permitting termination,
in whole or in part, without prior notice at the
governments convenience upon the payment of compensation
only for work done and commitments made at the time of
termination. We cannot assure you that one or more of the
government contracts under which our customers or we operate
will not be terminated under these circumstances. Also, we
cannot assure you that we or our customers would be able to
procure new government contracts to offset the revenues lost as
a result of any termination of existing contracts, nor can we
assure you that we or our customers will continue to remain in
good standing as federal contractors.
Furthermore, the funding of multi-year government programs is
subject to congressional appropriations, and there is no
guarantee that the U.S. government will make further
appropriations. The loss of funding for a government program
would result in a loss of future revenues attributable to that
program.
In addition, sales to the U.S. government and its prime
contractors may be affected by changes in procurement policies,
budget considerations and political developments in the United
States or abroad. The influence of any of these factors, which
are beyond our control, could also negatively impact our
financial condition. We also may experience problems associated
with advanced designs required by the government, which may
result in unforeseen technological difficulties and cost
overruns. Failure to overcome these technological difficulties
or occurrence of cost overruns would have a material adverse
effect on our business.
Unexpected
increases in the cost to develop or manufacture our products
under fixed-price contracts may cause us to experience
un-reimbursed cost overruns.
A portion of our revenue is derived from fixed-price development
and production contracts. Under fixed-price contracts,
unexpected increases in the cost to develop or manufacture a
product, whether due to inaccurate estimates in the bidding
process, unanticipated increases in material costs, reduced
production volumes, inefficiencies or other factors, are borne
by us. We have experienced cost overruns in the past that have
resulted in losses on certain contracts, and may experience
additional cost overruns in the future. We are required to
recognize the total estimated impact of cost overruns in the
period in which they are first identified. Such cost overruns
could have a material adverse effect on our results of operation
and financial condition.
Our
sales of Equipment products are dependent on substantial capital
investment by our customers, far in excess of the cost of our
products.
Our customers must make extremely large capital expenditures in
order to purchase our systems and other related equipment and
facilities. These costs are far in excess of the cost of our
systems alone. The magnitude of such capital expenditures
requires that our customers have access to large amounts of
capital and that they be willing to invest that capital over
long periods of time to be able to purchase our equipment. The
magnetic disk and semiconductor manufacturing industries have
made significant additions to their production capacity in the
last few years. Our customers may not be willing or able to
continue this level of capital investment, especially during a
downturn in the overall economy, the hard disk drive industry,
or the semiconductor industry.
Our
stock price is volatile.
The market price and trading volume of our common stock has been
subject to significant volatility, and this trend may continue.
During 2007, the closing price of our common stock, as traded on
The Nasdaq National Market, fluctuated from a low of $13.23 per
share to a high of $30.57 per share. More recently, our stock
price has closed as low as $10.14 per share. The value of our
common stock may decline regardless of our operating performance
or prospects. Factors affecting our market price include:
|
|
|
|
|
our perceived prospects;
|
|
|
|
hard disk drive market expectations;
|
|
|
|
variations in our operating results and whether we achieve our
key business targets;
|
|
|
|
sales or purchases of large blocks of our stock;
|
15
|
|
|
|
|
changes in, or our failure to meet, our revenue and earnings
estimates;
|
|
|
|
changes in securities analysts buy or sell recommendations;
|
|
|
|
differences between our reported results and those expected by
investors and securities analysts;
|
|
|
|
announcements of new contracts, products or technological
innovations by us or our competitors;
|
|
|
|
market reaction to any acquisitions, joint ventures or strategic
investments announced by us or our competitors;
|
|
|
|
our high fixed operating expenses, including research and
development expenses;
|
|
|
|
developments in the financial markets; and
|
|
|
|
general economic, political or stock market conditions in the
United States and other major regions in which we do business.
|
In addition, the general economic, political, stock market and
industry conditions that may affect the market price of our
common stock are beyond our control. The market price of our
common stock at any particular time may not remain the market
price in the future. In the past, securities class action
litigation has been instituted against companies following
periods of volatility in the market price of their securities.
Any such litigation, if instituted against us, could result in
substantial costs and a diversion of managements attention
and resources.
The
liquidity of our Auction Rate Securities may be impaired, which
may impact our ability to meet our cash requirements and require
additional debt funding.
At December 31, 2007, we held $81.5 million of Auction
Rate Securities. These securities have long-term underlying
maturities (ranging from 20 to 40 years), but the market
has historically been highly liquid and the interest rates reset
every 7 or 28 days. We do not intend to hold these
securities to maturity, but rather to use the interest rate
reset feature to sell the securities as needed to provide
liquidity. Beginning in mid-February of 2008, certain of these
Auction Rate Securities failed auction due to sell orders
exceeding buy orders. The funds associated with failed auctions
will not be accessible until a successful auction occurs or a
buyer is found outside of the auction process. We do not know
when, or if, one of these circumstances will occur. All of our
Auction Rate Securities are student loan structured issues,
where the loans have been originated under the Department of
Educations Federal Family Education Loan Program and the
principal and interest is 97% reinsured by the
U.S. Department of Education. At this time, there has been
no change in the AAA rating of these securities, but we cannot
be certain that no change will occur in the future. We may also
be required to reclassify all or a part of these securities from
short-term to long-term investments. If the issuer of the
auction rate securities is unable to successfully close future
auctions or does not redeem the auction rate securities, or the
United States government fails to support its guaranty of the
obligations, the Company may be required to adjust the carrying
value of the auction rate securities and record an
other-than-temporary
impairment charge. We have entered into a line of credit with
Citigroup Global Markets Inc. under which approximately
$20 million is available to us to help secure our ability
to fund our cash requirements until we are able to liquidate our
Auction Rate Securities, but if we are unable to maintain the
line of credit, or if the interest rate of the line of credit is
prohibitive or the amount of the line of credit is insufficient,
we could experience difficulties in meeting our cash
requirements until the market for the Auction Rate Securities
becomes liquid again and we may have to seek additional debt
funding to finance our operations.
Changes
in tax rates or tax liabilities could affect future
results.
As a global company, we are subject to taxation in the United
States and various other countries. Significant judgment is
required to determine and estimate worldwide tax liabilities.
Our future tax rates could be affected by changes in the
applicable tax laws, composition of earnings in countries with
differing tax rates, changes in the valuation of our deferred
tax assets and liabilities, or changes in the tax laws. Although
we believe our tax estimates are reasonable, there can be no
assurance that any final determination will not be materially
different from the treatment reflected in our historical income
tax provisions and accruals, which could materially and
adversely affect our results of operations.
16
Our effective tax rate in both 2007 was well below the
applicable statutory rates due primarily to permanent
differences and the utilization of research and development
credits. In 2006, our effective tax rate was well below the
applicable statutory rates due primarily to the utilization of
net operating loss carry-forwards and deferred credits.
We
have experienced significant growth and contraction in our
business and operations and if we do not appropriately manage
this growth and contraction, now and in the future, then our
operating results will be negatively affected.
Our business has both grown and contracted significantly in
recent years, in both operations and headcount, and this growth
and contraction causes significant strain on our infrastructure,
internal systems and managerial resources. To manage our growth
and contraction effectively, we must continue to improve and
enhance our infrastructure, including information technology and
financial operating and administrative systems and controls, and
continue managing headcount, capital and processes in an
efficient manner. Our productivity and the quality of our
products may be adversely affected if we do not integrate and
train our new employees quickly and effectively and coordinate
among our executive, engineering, finance, marketing, sales,
operations and customer support organizations, all of which add
to the complexity of our organization and increase our operating
expenses. We also may be less able to predict and effectively
control our operating expenses due to the growth and increasing
complexity of our business. In addition, our information
technology systems may not grow at a sufficient rate to keep up
with the processing and information demands placed on them by a
much larger company. The efforts to continue to expand our
information technology systems or our inability to do so could
harm our business. Further, revenues may not grow at a
sufficient rate to absorb the costs associated with a larger
overall headcount.
Our future growth may require significant additional resources,
given that, as we increase our business operations in complexity
and scale, we may have insufficient management capabilities and
internal bandwidth to manage our growth and business
effectively. We cannot assure you that resources will be
available when we need them or that we will have sufficient
capital to fund these potential resource needs. If we are unable
to manage our growth effectively or if we experience a shortfall
in resources, our results of operations will be harmed.
Our
current and future success depends on international sales and
the management of global operations.
In 2007, approximately 82% of our revenues came from regions
outside the United States. Substantially all of our
international sales are to customers in Asia, which includes
products shipped to overseas operations of U.S. companies.
We currently have international customer support offices in
Singapore, China, Malaysia, Korea and Japan. We expect that
international sales will continue to account for a significant
portion of our total revenue in future years. Certain of our
manufacturing facilities and suppliers are also located outside
the United States. Managing our global operations presents
challenges including, but not limited to, those arising from:
|
|
|
|
|
varying regional and geopolitical business conditions and
demands;
|
|
|
|
global trade issues;
|
|
|
|
variations in protection of intellectual property and other
legal rights in different countries;
|
|
|
|
rising raw material and energy costs;
|
|
|
|
variations in the ability to develop relationships with
suppliers and other local businesses;
|
|
|
|
changes in laws and regulations of the United States (including
export restrictions) and other countries, as well as their
interpretation and application;
|
|
|
|
fluctuations in interest rates and currency exchange rates,
particularly with the recent decline in the value of the
U.S. dollar;
|
|
|
|
the need to provide sufficient levels of technical support in
different locations;
|
|
|
|
political instability, natural disasters (such as earthquakes,
hurricanes or floods), pandemics, terrorism or acts of war where
we have operations, suppliers or sales;
|
17
|
|
|
|
|
cultural differences; and
|
|
|
|
shipping delays.
|
Changes
in existing financial accounting standards or practices or
taxation rules or practices may adversely affect our results of
operations.
Changes in existing accounting or taxation rules or practices,
new accounting pronouncements or taxation rules, or varying
interpretations of current accounting pronouncements or taxation
practice could have a significant adverse effect on our results
of operations or the manner in which we conduct our business.
Further, such changes could potentially affect our reporting of
transactions completed before such changes are effective. In
June 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes
(FIN 48). FIN 48, which was effective
January 1, 2007, clarifies the accounting for uncertainty
in income taxes recognized in an enterprises financial
statements in accordance with FASB Statement No. 109,
Accounting for Income Taxes. We adopted FIN 48
in the first quarter of fiscal year 2007.
We are
required to evaluate our internal control over financial
reporting under Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, and any adverse results from such evaluation could
result in a loss of investor confidence in our financial reports
and have an adverse effect on our stock price.
Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
our management must perform evaluations of our internal control
over financial reporting. Beginning in 2004, our
Form 10-K
has included a report by management of their assessment of the
adequacy of such internal control. Additionally, our independent
registered public accounting firm must publicly attest to the
effectiveness of our internal control.
We have completed the evaluation of our internal controls over
financial reporting as required by Section 404 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Although our assessment, testing, and
evaluation resulted in our conclusion that as of
December 31, 2007, our internal controls over financial
reporting were effective, we cannot predict the outcome of our
testing in future periods. If our internal controls are
ineffective in future periods, our financial results or the
market price of our shares could be adversely affected. We will
incur additional expenses and commitment of managements
time in connection with further evaluations.
Our
dependence on suppliers for certain parts, some of them
sole-sourced, makes us vulnerable to manufacturing interruptions
and delays, which could affect our ability to meet customer
demand.
We are a manufacturing business. Purchased parts constitute the
largest component of our product cost. Our ability to
manufacture depends on the timely delivery of parts, components
and subassemblies from suppliers. We obtain some of the key
components and
sub-assemblies
used in our products from a single supplier or a limited group
of suppliers. If any of our suppliers fail to deliver quality
parts on a timely basis, we may experience delays in
manufacturing, which could result in delayed product deliveries
or increased costs to expedite deliveries or develop alternative
suppliers. Development of alternative suppliers could require
redesign of our products.
Our
business depends on the integrity of our intellectual property
rights and failure to protect our intellectual property rights
adequately could have a material adverse effect on our
business.
The success of our business depends upon the integrity of our
intellectual property rights, and we cannot assure you that:
|
|
|
|
|
any of our pending or future patent applications will be allowed
or that any of the allowed applications will be issued as
patents or will issue with claims of the scope we sought;
|
|
|
|
any of our patents will not be invalidated, deemed
unenforceable, circumvented or challenged;
|
|
|
|
the rights granted under our patents will provide competitive
advantages to us;
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
other parties will not develop similar products, duplicate our
products or design around our patents; or
|
|
|
|
our patent rights, intellectual property laws or our agreements
will adequately protect our intellectual property or competitive
position.
|
We may
be subject to claims of intellectual property
infringement.
From time to time, we have received claims that we are
infringing third parties intellectual property rights or
seeking to invalidate our rights. We cannot assure you that
third parties will not in the future claim that we have
infringed current or future patents, trademarks or other
proprietary rights relating to our products. Any claims, with or
without merit, could be time-consuming, result in costly
litigation, cause product shipment delays or require us to enter
into royalty or licensing agreements. Such royalty or licensing
agreements, if required, may not be available on terms
acceptable to us.
Our
success is dependent on recruiting and retaining a highly
talented work force.
Our employees are vital to our success, and our key management,
engineering and other employees are difficult to replace. We
generally do not have employment contracts with our key
employees. Further, we do not maintain key person life insurance
on any of our employees. The expansion of high technology
companies worldwide has increased demand and competition for
qualified personnel, and has made companies increasingly
protective of prior employees. It may be difficult for us to
locate employees who are not subject to non-competition
agreements and other restrictions.
The majority of our U.S. operations are located in
Santa Clara, California and Fremont, California, where the
cost of living and of recruiting employees is high.
Additionally, our operating results depend, in large part, upon
our ability to retain and attract qualified management,
engineering, marketing, manufacturing, customer support, sales
and administrative personnel. Furthermore, we compete with
similar industries, such as the semiconductor industry, for the
same pool of skilled employees. If we are unable to retain key
personnel, or if we are not able to attract, assimilate or
retain additional highly qualified employees to meet our needs
in the future, our business and operations could be harmed.
Changes
in demand caused by fluctuations in interest and currency
exchange rates may reduce our international sales.
Sales and operating activities outside of the United States are
subject to inherent risks, including fluctuations in the value
of the U.S. dollar relative to foreign currencies, tariffs,
quotas, taxes and other market barriers, political and economic
instability, restrictions on the export or import of technology,
potentially limited intellectual property protection,
difficulties in staffing and managing international operations
and potentially adverse tax consequences. We earn a significant
portion of our revenue from international sales, and there can
be no assurance that any of these factors will not have an
adverse effect on our ability to sell our products or operate
outside the United States.
We currently quote and sell the majority of our products in
U.S. dollars. From time to time, we may enter into foreign
currency contracts in an effort to reduce the overall risk of
currency fluctuations to our business. However, there can be no
assurance that the offer and sale of products denominated in
foreign currencies, and the related foreign currency hedging
activities, will not adversely affect our business.
Our principal competitor for disk sputtering equipment is based
in Japan and has a cost structure based on the Japanese yen.
Accordingly, currency fluctuations could cause the price of our
products to be more or less competitive than our principal
competitors products. Currency fluctuations will decrease
or increase our cost structure relative to those of our
competitors, which could lessen the demand for our products and
affect our competitive position.
Difficulties
in integrating past or future acquisitions could adversely
affect our business.
We have completed a number of acquisitions during our operating
history. In early 2007, we completed the acquisition of certain
assets of DeltaNu, LLC, and in the fourth quarter of 2007 we
completed the acquisition of certain assets of Creative Display
Systems, LLC. We have spent and will continue to spend
significant resources
19
identifying and acquiring businesses. The efficient and
effective integration of our acquired businesses into our
organization is critical to our growth. Any future acquisitions
involve numerous risks including difficulties in integrating the
operations, technologies and products of the acquired companies,
the diversion of our managements attention from other
business concerns and the potential loss of key employees of the
acquired companies. Failure to achieve the anticipated benefits
of these and any future acquisitions or to successfully
integrate the operations of the companies we acquire could also
harm our business, results of operations and cash flows. Any
future acquisitions may also result in potentially dilutive
issuance of equity securities, acquisition- or
divestiture-related write-offs or the assumption of debt and
contingent liabilities.
We use
hazardous materials and are subject to risks of non-compliance
with environmental and safety regulations.
We are subject to a variety of governmental regulations relating
to the use, storage, discharge, handling, emission, generation,
manufacture, treatment and disposal of toxic or otherwise
hazardous substances, chemicals, materials or waste. If we fail
to comply with current or future regulations, such failure could
result in suspension of our operations, alteration of our
manufacturing process, or substantial civil penalties or
criminal fines against us or our officers, directors or
employees. Additionally, these regulations could require us to
acquire expensive remediation or abatement equipment or to incur
substantial expenses to comply with them. Failure to properly
manage the use, disposal or storage of, or adequately restrict
the release of, hazardous or toxic substances could subject us
to significant liabilities.
Future
sales of shares of our common stock by our officers, directors
and affiliates could cause our stock price to
decline.
Substantially all of our common stock may be sold without
restriction in the public markets, although shares held by our
directors, executive officers and affiliates may be subject to
volume and manner of sale restrictions. Sales of a substantial
number of shares of common stock in the public market by our
officers, directors or affiliates or the perception that these
sales could occur could materially and adversely affect our
stock price and make it more difficult for us to sell equity
securities in the future at a time and price we deem appropriate.
Anti-takeover
provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could
prevent or delay a change in control, which could negatively
impact the value of our common stock by discouraging a favorable
merger or acquisition of us.
Our certificate of incorporation authorizes our board of
directors to issue up to 10,000,000 shares of preferred
stock and to determine the powers, preferences, privileges,
rights, including voting rights, qualifications, limitations and
restrictions of those shares, without any further vote or action
by the stockholders. The rights of the holders of our common
stock will be subject to, and may be adversely affected by, the
rights of the holders of any preferred stock that we may issue
in the future. The issuance of preferred stock could have the
effect of delaying, deterring or preventing a change in control
and could adversely affect the voting power of your shares. In
addition, provisions of Delaware law and our bylaws could make
it more difficult for a third party to acquire a majority of our
outstanding voting stock by discouraging a hostile bid, or
delaying or deterring a merger, acquisition or tender offer in
which our stockholders could receive a premium for their shares
or a proxy contest for control of our company or other changes
in our management.
We
could be involved in litigation.
From time to time we may be involved in litigation of various
types, including litigation alleging infringement of
intellectual property rights and other claims. For example, in
July 2006, we filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Unaxis
USA, Inc. and its affiliates Unaxis Balzers AG and Unaxis
Balzers, Ltd. alleging infringement by Unaxis of a patent
relating to our 200 Lean system. See Part I, Item 3 of
this
Form 10-K
for further information regarding this lawsuit. Litigation is
expensive and can require significant management time and
attention and could have a negative effect on our results of
operations or business if we lose or have to settle a case on
significantly adverse terms.
20
Business
interruptions could adversely affect our
operations.
Our operations are vulnerable to interruption by fire,
earthquake or other natural disaster, quarantines or other
disruptions associated with infectious diseases, national
catastrophe, terrorist activities, war, disruptions in our
computing and communications infrastructure due to power loss,
telecommunications failure, human error, physical or electronic
security breaches and computer viruses, and other events beyond
our control. We do not have a fully implemented detailed
disaster recovery plan. Despite our implementation of network
security measures, our tools and servers are vulnerable to
computer viruses, break-ins and similar disruptions from
unauthorized tampering with our computer systems and tools
located at customer sites. Political instability could cause us
to incur increased costs in transportation, make such
transportation unreliable, increase our insurance costs and
cause international currency markets to fluctuate. This same
instability could have the same effects on our suppliers and
their ability to timely deliver their products. In addition, we
do not carry sufficient business interruption insurance to
compensate us for all losses that may occur, and any losses or
damages incurred by us could have a material adverse effect on
our business and results of operations. For example, we
self-insure earthquake risks, because we believe this is the
prudent financial decision based on the high cost of the limited
coverage available in the earthquake insurance market. An
earthquake could significantly disrupt our operations, most of
which are conducted in California. It could also significantly
delay our research and engineering effort on new products, most
of which is also conducted in California. We take steps to
minimize the damage that would be caused by an earthquake, but
there is no certainty that our efforts will prove successful in
the event of an earthquake.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
We maintain our corporate headquarters in Santa Clara,
California. The location, approximate size and type of facility
of our principal properties are listed below. We lease all of
our properties and do not own any real estate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location
|
|
Square Footage
|
|
|
Lease Expire
|
|
|
Principal Use
|
|
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
169,583
|
|
|
|
Mar 2012
|
|
|
Corporate Headquarters; Equipment and Imaging Instrumentation
Marketing, Manufacturing, Engineering and Customer Support
|
Fremont, CA
|
|
|
9,505
|
|
|
|
Feb 2013
|
|
|
Imaging Instrumentation Sensor Fabrication
|
Laramie, WY
|
|
|
4,000
|
|
|
|
Feb 2009
|
|
|
Imaging Instrumentation Raman Spectrometer Mfg
|
Carlsbad, CA
|
|
|
10,360
|
|
|
|
May 2010
|
|
|
Imaging Instrumentation Micro Display Product Mfg
|
Chicago, IL
|
|
|
120
|
|
|
|
Aug 2008
|
|
|
Imaging Instrumentation Micro Display Product Sales
|
Singapore
|
|
|
31,947
|
|
|
|
Jun 2010
|
|
|
Equipment Manufacturing and Customer Support
|
Korea
|
|
|
1,558
|
|
|
|
May 2008
|
|
|
Equipment Customer Support
|
Malaysia
|
|
|
1,291
|
|
|
|
Aug 2008
|
|
|
Equipment Customer Support
|
Japan
|
|
|
1,507
|
|
|
|
Nov 2008
|
|
|
Equipment Customer Support
|
Shenzhen, China
|
|
|
2,568
|
|
|
|
Jul 2008
|
|
|
Equipment Customer Support
|
We consider these properties adequate to meet our current and
future requirements. We regularly assess the size, capability
and location of our global infrastructure and periodically make
adjustments based on these assessments.
21
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
Patent
Infringement Complaint against Unaxis
On July 7, 2006, we filed a patent infringement lawsuit
against Unaxis USA, Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of Oerlikon)
and its affiliates, Unaxis Balzers AG and Unaxis Balzers, Ltd.,
in the United States District Court for the Central District of
California. Our lawsuit against Unaxis asserts infringement by
Unaxis of United States Patent 6,919,001, which relates to our
200 Lean system. Our complaint seeks monetary damages and an
injunction that bars Unaxis from making, using, offering to sell
or selling in the United States, or importing into the United
States, Unaxis allegedly infringing product. In the suit,
we seek damages and a permanent injunction for infringement of
the same patent. We believe we have meritorious claims, and we
intend to pursue them vigorously.
On September 12, 2006, Unaxis filed a response to our
lawsuit in which it asserted non-infringement, invalidity of our
patent, inequitable conduct by Intevac, patent misuse by
Intevac, and lack of jurisdiction by the court as defenses.
Additionally, Unaxis requested a declaratory judgment of patent
non-infringement, invalidity and unenforceability; asserted our
violation of the California Business and Professional Code;
requested that we be enjoined from engaging in any unfair
competition; and requested that we be required to pay
Unaxis attorney fees. We believe such claims lack merit,
and we intend to defend ourselves vigorously.
We replied to Unaxis response on October 3, 2006,
denying the assertions of non-infringement, invalidity and
unenforceability of the Intevac patent, and denying any unfair
competition. With the approval of the Court, we amended our
complaint on February 6, 2007 to assert an additional
ground for our infringement claim and to add a request for a
declaratory judgment of infringement. Unaxis filed a response on
February 21, 2007, in which it repeated the assertions of
its September 12, 2006 response.
On May 21, 2007, the Court granted Unaxis request to
stay the litigation pending reexamination of our United States
Patent 6,919,001, after the U.S. Patent Office granted
Unaxis February 27, 2007 reexamination request and
issued an initial office action rejecting the claims of the
patent. The Court also ordered the parties to file a joint
report every 120 days to keep it appraised of the
reexamination status. Intevac had no input to the initial office
action determination by the U.S. Patent Office.
On June 20, 2007, we filed a reply to the initial office
action reexamination. Our reply addresses the office
actions rejections of the patents original claims
and proposes amended claims that we believe are supported by the
original patents specification. Unaxis responded to our
reply, and the U.S. Patent Office is now considering both
parties submissions. During the reexamination process, the
patent remains valid.
Other
Legal Matters
From time to time, we are involved in claims and legal
proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of business. We
expect that the number and significance of these matters will
increase as our business expands. Any claims or proceedings
against us, whether meritorious or not, could be time consuming,
result in costly litigation, require significant amounts of
management time, result in the diversion of significant
operational resources, or require us to enter into royalty or
licensing agreements which, if required, may not be available on
terms favorable to us or at all. We are not presently party to
any lawsuit or proceeding that, in our opinion, is likely to
seriously harm our business.
|
|
Item 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security-Holders
|
No matters were submitted to a vote of security-holders during
the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
22
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Price
Range of Common Stock
Our common stock is listed on The Nasdaq National Market (NASDAQ
Global Select) under the symbol IVAC. As of
March 10, 2008, there were approximately 124 holders of
record of our common stock. Because many of our shares of common
stock are held by brokers and other institutions on behalf of
stockholders, we are unable to estimate the total number of
stockholders represented by these record holders.
The following table sets forth the high and low closing sale
prices per share as reported on The Nasdaq National Market for
the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Fiscal 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
28.80
|
|
|
$
|
13.42
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
30.60
|
|
|
|
18.86
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
25.35
|
|
|
|
14.81
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
27.94
|
|
|
|
16.29
|
|
Fiscal 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
30.57
|
|
|
$
|
22.00
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
26.77
|
|
|
|
18.92
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
22.37
|
|
|
|
13.23
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
18.12
|
|
|
|
14.01
|
|
Dividend
Policy
We currently anticipate that we will retain our earnings, if
any, for use in the operation of our business and do not expect
to pay cash dividends on our capital stock in the foreseeable
future.
23
Performance
Graph
The following graph compares the cumulative total stockholder
return on our Common Stock with that of the NASDAQ Stock Market
Total Return Index, a broad market index published by the Center
for Research in Security Prices (CRSP), and the
NASDAQ Computer Manufacturers Stock Total Return Index compiled
by CRSP. The comparison for each of the periods assumes that
$100 was invested on December 31, 2002 in our Common Stock,
the stocks included in the NASDAQ Stock Market Total Return
Index and the stocks included in the NASDAQ Computer
Manufacturers Stock Total Return Index. These indices, which
reflect formulas for dividend reinvestment and weighting of
individual stocks, do not necessarily reflect returns that could
be achieved by individual investors.
COMPARISON
OF CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN SINCE DECEMBER 31, 2002
AMONG INTEVAC, NASDAQ STOCK MARKET TOTAL RETURN INDEX AND
NASDAQ COMPUTER MANUFACTURERS TOTAL RETURN INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/31/02
|
|
|
|
12/31/03
|
|
|
|
12/31/04
|
|
|
|
12/30/05
|
|
|
|
12/29/06
|
|
|
|
12/31/07
|
|
Intevac, Inc.
|
|
|
$
|
100
|
|
|
|
$
|
353
|
|
|
|
$
|
190
|
|
|
|
$
|
331
|
|
|
|
$
|
650
|
|
|
|
$
|
364
|
|
Nasdaq Stock Market Total Return Index
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
|
163
|
|
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
|
183
|
|
|
|
|
198
|
|
Nasdaq Computer Manufacturers Total Return Index
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
|
181
|
|
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
|
189
|
|
|
|
|
277
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Consolidated Financial Data
|
The following table presents our selected financial data and is
qualified by reference to, and should be read in conjunction
with, the consolidated financial statements of Intevac,
including the notes thereto, and Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,
each appearing elsewhere in this report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Operations Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Systems and components
|
|
$
|
202,292
|
|
|
$
|
250,158
|
|
|
$
|
130,168
|
|
|
$
|
61,326
|
|
|
$
|
27,738
|
|
Technology development
|
|
|
13,542
|
|
|
|
9,717
|
|
|
|
7,061
|
|
|
|
8,289
|
|
|
|
8,556
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net revenues
|
|
|
215,834
|
|
|
|
259,875
|
|
|
|
137,229
|
|
|
|
69,615
|
|
|
|
36,294
|
|
Cost of net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Systems and components
|
|
|
111,514
|
|
|
|
151,287
|
|
|
|
87,525
|
|
|
|
45,528
|
|
|
|
19,689
|
|
Technology development
|
|
|
7,415
|
|
|
|
6,102
|
|
|
|
5,253
|
|
|
|
6,856
|
|
|
|
6,032
|
|
Inventory provisions
|
|
|
862
|
|
|
|
1,527
|
|
|
|
873
|
|
|
|
1,375
|
|
|
|
743
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of net revenues
|
|
|
119,791
|
|
|
|
158,916
|
|
|
|
93,651
|
|
|
|
53,759
|
|
|
|
26,464
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
96,043
|
|
|
|
100,959
|
|
|
|
43,578
|
|
|
|
15,856
|
|
|
|
9,830
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
40,137
|
|
|
|
30,036
|
|
|
|
14,384
|
|
|
|
11,580
|
|
|
|
12,037
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
28,470
|
|
|
|
22,924
|
|
|
|
14,477
|
|
|
|
9,525
|
|
|
|
8,448
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
68,607
|
|
|
|
52,960
|
|
|
|
28,861
|
|
|
|
21,105
|
|
|
|
20,485
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
27,436
|
|
|
|
47,999
|
|
|
|
14,717
|
|
|
|
(5,249
|
)
|
|
|
(10,655
|
)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
6,544
|
|
|
|
3,501
|
|
|
|
1,303
|
|
|
|
634
|
|
|
|
269
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
1,598
|
|
|
|
277
|
|
|
|
552
|
|
|
|
381
|
|
|
|
(1,879
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
35,578
|
|
|
|
51,777
|
|
|
|
16,572
|
|
|
|
(4,234
|
)
|
|
|
(12,265
|
)
|
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes
|
|
|
8,233
|
|
|
|
5,079
|
|
|
|
421
|
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
27,345
|
|
|
$
|
46,698
|
|
|
$
|
16,151
|
|
|
$
|
(4,344
|
)
|
|
$
|
(12,303
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
1.28
|
|
|
$
|
2.22
|
|
|
$
|
0.79
|
|
|
$
|
(0.22
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.95
|
)
|
Shares used in per share calculations
|
|
|
21,447
|
|
|
|
21,015
|
|
|
|
20,462
|
|
|
|
19,749
|
|
|
|
12,948
|
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
1.23
|
|
|
$
|
2.13
|
|
|
$
|
0.76
|
|
|
$
|
(0.22
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.95
|
)
|
Shares used in per share calculations
|
|
|
22,150
|
|
|
|
21,936
|
|
|
|
21,202
|
|
|
|
19,749
|
|
|
|
12,948
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and short-term Investments
|
|
$
|
138,658
|
|
|
$
|
95,035
|
|
|
$
|
49,731
|
|
|
$
|
42,034
|
|
|
$
|
19,507
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
154,630
|
|
|
|
118,061
|
|
|
|
77,353
|
|
|
|
53,100
|
|
|
|
22,638
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
215,413
|
|
|
|
206,003
|
|
|
|
130,444
|
|
|
|
79,622
|
|
|
|
55,975
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
1,898
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
185,163
|
|
|
|
144,310
|
|
|
|
87,874
|
|
|
|
69,375
|
|
|
|
30,869
|
|
25
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
The following discussion and analysis contains
forward-looking statements which involve risks and
uncertainties. Words such as believes,
expects, anticipates and the like
indicate forward-looking statements. These forward looking
statements include comments related to our projected revenue,
gross margin, operating expense, profitability, income tax
expense, effective tax rate, capital spending and cash balances;
the adequacy of our cash balances to fund our operations;
projected volatility in our financial results; projected
customer requirements for new capacity and technology upgrades
for our installed base of magnetic disk manufacturing equipment
and when, and if, our customers will place orders for these
products; projected change from period to period in the
customers, and location of customers, that constitute the
majority of our revenues; the length of development, marketing
and deployment cycles for military customers; Imaging
Instrumentations ability to proliferate its technology
into major military weapons programs and to develop and
introduce commercial products; and the timing of delivery
and/or
acceptance of our backlog for revenue. Our actual results may
differ materially from the results discussed in the
forward-looking statements for a variety of reasons, including
those set forth under Risk Factors and should be
read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements
and related Notes contained elsewhere in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Overview
Intevacs business consists of two reportable segments:
Equipment: Intevac is a leader in the design,
manufacture and marketing of high-productivity lean
manufacturing systems and has been producing Lean
Thinking platforms since 1994. We are the leading supplier
of magnetic media sputtering equipment to the hard disk drive
industry and offer leading-edge, high-productivity etch systems
to the semiconductor industry.
Imaging Instrumentation: Intevac is a leader
in the development of compact, cost-effective, high-sensitivity
digital-optical products for the capture and display of
low-light images and the optical analysis of materials. We
provide sensors, cameras and systems for commercial applications
in the inspection, medical, scientific and security industries
and for government applications such as night vision and
long-range target identification.
Equipment
Business
In the early 1990s we developed a system, the MDP-250, to
deposit magnetic films and protective overcoats onto magnetic
disks used in hard disk drives. This system gained wide
acceptance and by the late 1990s was being used to manufacture
approximately half of the disks used in hard disk drives
worldwide. In late 2003, we introduced a new system, the 200
Lean. The hard disk drive industry has gone through significant
consolidation, and there are now only seven significant
manufacturers of magnetic disks, some of whom also manufacture
hard disk drives. As a result of the small number of customers
and the high average selling price of our products, our
Equipment revenues tend to be volatile from quarter to quarter.
In addition, our Equipment business has historically been
subject to capital spending cycles. For example, in the period
from 1995 through the middle of 1998, we sold $300 million
of disk manufacturing equipment. In the period from the middle
of 1998 thru 2003, our disk equipment revenues averaged
approximately $20 million per year and consisted of the
sale of a limited number of systems, technology upgrades, parts
and service for the installed base of our systems. In 2006, our
sales of disk manufacturing equipment grew to $248 million
in annual revenues. In 2007, shipments of new disk sputtering
systems declined and our revenue from sales of disk
manufacturing equipment dropped to $197 million.
In the past we also manufactured both deposition and rapid
thermal processing equipment used in the manufacture of flat
panel displays. In late 2002, we sold our rapid thermal
processing product line and stopped actively marketing our flat
panel deposition product line. From 2000 through 2004,
cumulative revenues from sales of flat panel display
manufacturing systems totaled $36.8 million. 2005 revenues
included $5 million from selling a license to one of our
flat panel patents and recognizing revenue on the last flat
panel system we shipped.
26
Imaging
Instrumentation Business
Developing advanced products for the military involves long
development cycles, as products move through successive
multi-year stages of technology demonstration, engineering and
manufacturing product development, prototype production and then
product deployment. Each stage in this process requires ongoing
government funding. Historically, much of our Imaging
Instrumentation business revenues have been derived from
contract research and development, rather than product sales. In
2002, in order to shorten the time to market and to increase the
number of markets for our imaging products, we began to fund
development of imaging products for commercial markets. In
January 2007, we completed the acquisition of the assets and
certain liabilities of DeltaNu, LLC, a company that pioneered
development of miniature Raman spectrometer systems. In November
2007 we completed and acquisition of the assets and certain
liabilities of Creative Display Systems, LLC, a company that
specializes in high-performance, micro-display products for
near-eye and portable applications in defense and commercial
markets. As a result of these activities and the internal
development of new products for military and commercial
applications, the percentage of Imaging Instrumentation revenues
derived from product sales grew from 15% in 2006 to 27% in 2007
and is expected to continue to increase in 2008.
Critical
Accounting Policies
The preparation of financial statements and related disclosures
in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America (US GAAP) requires
management to make judgments, assumptions and estimates that
affect the amounts reported. Our significant accounting policies
are described in Note 2 to the consolidated financial
statements included in Item 8 of our Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Certain of these significant accounting policies are considered
to be critical accounting policies, as defined below.
A critical accounting policy is defined as one that is both
material to the presentation of our financial statements and
requires management to make difficult, subjective or complex
judgments that could have a material effect on our financial
conditions and results of operations. Specifically, critical
accounting estimates have the following attributes: 1) We
are required to make assumptions about matters that are highly
uncertain at the time of the estimate; and 2) different
estimates we could reasonably have used, or changes in the
estimate that are reasonably likely to occur, would have a
material effect on our financial condition or results of
operations.
Estimates and assumptions about future events and their effects
cannot be determined with certainty. We base our estimates on
historical experience and on various other assumptions believed
to be applicable and reasonable under the circumstances. These
estimates may change as new events occur, as additional
information is obtained and as our operating environment
changes. These changes have historically been minor and have
been included in our consolidated financial statements as soon
as they become known. In addition, management is periodically
faced with uncertainties, the outcomes of which are not within
its control and will not be known for prolonged periods of time.
Many of these uncertainties are discussed in the section above
entitled Risk Factors. Nonetheless, based on a
critical assessment of our accounting policies and the
underlying judgments and uncertainties affecting the application
of those policies, management believes that our consolidated
financial statements are fairly stated in accordance with US
GAAP, and provide a meaningful presentation of our financial
condition and results of operation.
We believe the following critical accounting policies affect the
more significant judgments and estimates we make in preparing
our consolidated financial statements. We also have other key
accounting policies and accounting estimates related to the
collectibility of trade receivables, customer advances, cash,
cash equivalents and investments, and prototype product costs.
We believe that these other accounting policies and other
accounting estimates either do not generally require us to make
estimates and judgments that are as difficult or subjective, or
are less likely to have a material impact on our reported
results of operation for a given period.
Revenue
Recognition
Certain of our system sales with customer acceptance provisions
are accounted for as multiple-element arrangements. If we have
previously met defined customer acceptance levels with the
specific type of system, then we recognize revenue for the fair
market value of the system upon shipment and transfer of title,
and recognize revenue for the fair market value of installation
and acceptance services when those services are completed. We
27
estimate the fair market value of the installation and
acceptance services based on our actual historical experience of
the relative cost of such installation and acceptance services.
For systems that have generally not been demonstrated to meet a
particular customers product specifications prior to
shipment, revenue recognition is typically deferred until
customer acceptance. For example, while initial shipments of our
200 Lean System were recognized as revenue upon customer
acceptance during 2004, revenue was recognized upon shipment for
the majority of 200 Leans shipped in 2005, 2006 and 2007. The
systems in backlog at December 31, 2007 are for a customer
for whom we have met defined customer acceptance levels, and we
expect to recognize revenue upon shipment. We anticipate that we
will recognize revenue on our newly developed systems in 2008
upon customer acceptance, until such systems meet defined
customer acceptance levels.
In some instances, hardware that is not essential to the
functioning of the system may be delivered after acceptance of
the system. In these cases, we estimate the fair market value of
the non-essential hardware as if it had been sold on a
stand-alone basis, and defer recognizing revenue on that value
until the hardware is delivered.
Revenues for systems without installation and acceptance
provisions, as well as revenues from technology upgrades, spare
parts, consumables and products built by the Imaging
Instrumentation business are recognized when title passes to our
customer. In certain cases, technology upgrade sales are
accounted for as multiple-element arrangements, usually split
between delivery of the parts and installation on the
customers systems. In these cases, we recognize revenue
for the fair market value of the parts upon shipment and
transfer of title, and recognize revenue for the fair market
value of installation services when those services are completed.
In certain cases, we sell limited rights to our intellectual
property. Revenue from the sale of any intellectual property
license will generally be recognized at the inception of the
license term.
We perform best efforts research and development work under
various government-sponsored research contracts. These contracts
are a mixture of cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF) and firm
fixed-price (FFP). Revenue on CPFF contracts is
recognized in accordance with contract terms, typically as costs
are incurred. Revenue on FFP contracts is generally recognized
on the percentage-of-completion method based on costs incurred
in relation to total estimated costs. Provisions for estimated
losses on government-sponsored research contracts are recorded
in the period in which such losses are determined.
Inventories
Inventories are priced using average actual costs and are stated
at the lower of cost or market. The carrying value of inventory
is reduced for estimated excess and obsolescence by analyzing
historical and anticipated demand. In addition, inventories are
evaluated for potential obsolescence due to the effect of known
and anticipated engineering changes and new products. If actual
demand were to be substantially lower than estimated, additional
inventory adjustments would be required, which could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operation. A cost-to-market reserve is established
for
work-in-progress
and finished goods inventories when the value of the inventory
plus the estimated cost to complete exceeds the net realizable
value of the inventory.
Warranty
We provide for the estimated cost of warranty when revenue is
recognized. Our warranty is per contract terms and for our
systems the warranty typically ranges between 12 and
24 months from customer acceptance. For systems sold
through our distributor, we offer a 3 month warranty. The
remainder of any warranty period is the responsibility of the
distributor. During this warranty period any defective
non-consumable parts are replaced and installed at no charge to
the customer. The warranty period on consumable parts is limited
to their reasonable usable lives. We use estimated repair or
replacement costs along with our historical warranty experience
to determine our warranty obligation. We exercise judgment in
determining the underlying estimates. We also provide for
estimated retrofit costs, which typically relate to design
changes or improvements we identify. On a
case-by-case
basis, we determine whether or not to retrofit systems in the
field at no charge to the customer. Should actual warranty costs
differ substantially from our estimates, revisions to the
estimated warranty liability would be required, which could have
a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition
and results of operations.
28
Income
Taxes
We account for income taxes in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standard No. 109, Accounting for
Income Taxes, (SFAS 109), which requires
that deferred tax assets and liabilities be recognized using
enacted tax rates for the effect of temporary differences
between book and tax bases of recorded assets and liabilities.
SFAS 109 also requires that deferred tax assets be reduced
by a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that a
portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. As of
December 31, 2007, $7.3 million of the deferred tax
asset was valued on the balance sheet, net of a valuation
allowance of $2.7 million. This represents the amount of
the deferred tax asset from which we expect to realize a
benefit. We cannot predict with certainty when, or if, we will
realize the benefit of the portion of the deferred tax asset
currently offset with a valuation allowance.
On a quarterly basis, we provide for income taxes based upon an
annual effective income tax rate. The effective tax rate is
highly dependent upon the level of our projected earnings, the
geographic composition of worldwide earnings, tax regulations
governing each region, net operating loss carry-forwards,
availability of tax credits and the effectiveness of our tax
planning strategies. We carefully monitor the changes in many
factors and adjust our effective income tax rate on a timely
basis. If actual results differ from the estimates, this could
have a material effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations. For example, as our projected level of
earnings changed throughout 2007 and we benefited from various
tax planning strategies, we decreased the annual effective tax
rate from 31.6% at the end of the first quarter, to 26.9% at the
end of the second quarter, to 24.0% at the end of the third
quarter and to 23.1% at the end of the fourth quarter.
The calculation of tax liabilities involves significant judgment
in estimating the impact of uncertainties in the application of
complex tax laws. Resolution of these uncertainties in a manner
inconsistent with our expectations could have a material effect
on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Results
of Operations
Net
revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2007 vs. 2006
|
|
|
2006 vs. 2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except percentages)
|
|
|
Equipment net revenues
|
|
$
|
196,686
|
|
|
$
|
248,482
|
|
|
$
|
129,280
|
|
|
|
(21
|
)%
|
|
|
92
|
%
|
Imaging Instrumentation net revenues
|
|
|
19,148
|
|
|
|
11,393
|
|
|
|
7,949
|
|
|
|
68
|
%
|
|
|
43
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net revenues
|
|
$
|
215,834
|
|
|
$
|
259,875
|
|
|
$
|
137,229
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)%
|
|
|
89
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net revenues consist primarily of sales of equipment used to
manufacture thin-film disks, and, to a lesser extent, related
equipment and system components; flat panel equipment technology
license fees; contract research and development related to the
development of electro-optical sensors, cameras and systems; and
low light imaging products.
The decrease in Equipment revenues in 2007 was due primarily to
a reduction in the number of 200 Lean systems delivered. In 2007
we delivered twenty-nine 200 Lean systems versus forty-six 200
Lean systems delivered in 2006. Equipment revenue in 2007 also
included four disk lubrication systems and a significant
increase in revenue from disk equipment technology upgrades and
spare parts. We sold a
D-Star®
flat panel technology license for $1.3 million. During
2006, we also sold thirteen disk lubrication systems and had
significant sales of disk equipment technology upgrades and
spare parts. During 2005, we sold twenty-three 200 Lean systems,
six MDP-250 systems and fourteen disk lubrication systems. 2005
revenues also included $5.0 million of flat panel equipment
and license sales.
The magnetic disk manufacturing industry consists of a small
number of large manufacturers. In 2006 Seagate acquired Maxtor,
and in June 2007, Western Digital announced the acquisition of
Komag, both of which further concentrated our customer base. We
currently have seven 200 Lean systems either shipped or in
backlog, which are scheduled for revenue recognition during
2008. We expect Equipment revenues in 2008 to be significantly
lower than in 2007, due to fewer shipments of 200 Lean systems.
29
Imaging Instrumentation revenues increased by 68% to
$19.1 million in 2007, which consisted of $5.2 million
of product revenue and $13.9 million of contract research
and development revenue. The $11.4 million in 2006 Imaging
Instrumentation revenue consisted of $1.7 million of
product revenue and $9.7 million of contract research and
development revenue. The increase in product revenue resulted
from higher sales of digital night vision camera modules and
commercial products. Product revenue included contributions from
DeltaNu, which was acquired on January 31, 2007, and
Creative Display Systems, which was acquired on November 9,
2007. The increase in contract research and development revenue
was the result of a higher volume of contracts and incremental
revenue generated from contract close-outs. The
$7.9 million in 2005 Imaging Instrumentation revenues
consisted of $888,000 of product revenue and $7.0 million
of contract research and development revenue. In 2008, we expect
the Imaging Instrumentation revenue to grow significantly, due
primarily to increased product sales. During 2008, we expect
over 50% of our revenue to come from product sales. Substantial
growth in future Imaging Instrumentation revenues is dependent
on proliferation of our technology into major military weapons
programs, the ability to obtain export licenses for foreign
customers, obtaining production subcontracts for these programs,
and development and sale of commercial products.
Our backlog of orders at December 31, 2007 was
$34.2 million, as compared to a December 31, 2006
backlog of $125.0 million. The $34.2 million of
backlog at December 31, 2007 consisted of
$28.4 million of Equipment backlog and $5.8 million of
Imaging Instrumentation backlog. The $125.0 million of
backlog at December 31, 2006 consisted of
$119.4 million of Equipment backlog and $5.6 million
of Imaging Instrumentation backlog. Backlog at December 31,
2007 includes two 200 Lean systems, as compared to twenty-four
200 Lean systems in backlog at December 31, 2006. During
the first two months of 2008, we have received orders for five
additional 200 Lean systems.
Significant portions of our revenues in any particular period
have been attributable to sales to a limited number of
customers. In 2007 sales to Seagate, our Japanese distributor,
Matsubo, Hitachi Global Storage Technologies, and Fuji Electric
each accounted for more than 10% of our revenues, and in
aggregate accounted for 90% of revenues. In 2006, Seagate,
Matsubo, and Hitachi Global Storage Technologies each accounted
for more than 10% of our revenues, and in aggregate accounted
for 93% of revenues. In 2005, Seagate, Matsubo, Hitachi Global
Storage Technologies and Maxtor each accounted for more than 10%
of our revenues, and in aggregate accounted for 90% of revenues.
International sales totaled $177.0 million,
$233.4 million, and $97.5 million in 2007, 2006, and
2005, respectively, accounting for 82%, 90%, and 71% of net
revenues. The decrease in international sales in 2007 was
primarily due to a decrease in net revenues from disk sputtering
systems. The increase in international sales in 2006 was
primarily due to an increase in net revenues from disk
sputtering systems. Substantially all of our international sales
are to customers in Asia, which includes products shipped to
overseas operations of U.S. companies. Our mix of domestic
versus international sales will change from period to period
depending on the location of our largest customers in each
period.
Gross
margin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2007 vs. 2006
|
|
|
2006 vs. 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except percentages)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equipment gross profit
|
|
$
|
87,885
|
|
|
$
|
97,161
|
|
|
$
|
42,623
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)%
|
|
|
128
|
%
|
%of Equipment net revenues
|
|
|
44.7
|
%
|
|
|
39.1
|
%
|
|
|
33.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Imaging Instrumentation gross profit
|
|
$
|
8,158
|
|
|
$
|
3,798
|
|
|
$
|
955
|
|
|
|
115
|
%
|
|
|
298
|
%
|
%of Imaging Inst. net revenues
|
|
|
42.6
|
%
|
|
|
33.3
|
%
|
|
|
12.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross profit
|
|
$
|
96,043
|
|
|
$
|
100,959
|
|
|
$
|
43,578
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)%
|
|
|
132
|
%
|
%of net revenues
|
|
|
44.5
|
%
|
|
|
38.8
|
%
|
|
|
31.8
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of net revenues consists primarily of purchased materials
and costs attributable to contract research and development, and
also includes fabrication, assembly, test and installation labor
and overhead, customer-specific
30
engineering costs, warranty costs, royalties, provisions for
inventory reserves and scrap. Cost of net revenues for 2007 and
2006 included $638,000 and $428,000 of equity-based compensation
expense, respectively.
Equipment gross margin improved to 44.7% in 2007 from 39.1% in
2006. Our product mix, higher average selling prices and cost
reduction programs all contributed to the higher gross margin
for the year. Equipment gross margin in 2006 improved over the
gross margin achieved in 2005 due primarily to product mix,
higher average selling prices, cost reduction programs and
increased volume. We expect the gross margin for the Equipment
business in 2008 to be somewhat lower than in 2007, primarily as
a result of a reduction in volume. Gross margins in the
Equipment business will vary depending on a number of additional
factors, including product mix, product cost, system
configuration and pricing, factory utilization, and provisions
for excess and obsolete inventory.
Imaging Instrumentation gross margin improved to 42.6% in 2007
from 33.3% in 2006. The increase in gross margin resulted
primarily from higher margins on development contracts,
favorable adjustments related to contract closeouts and
increased product sales. The improvement in Imaging
Instrumentation gross margin in 2006 as compared to 2005 was
primarily due to a higher percentage of contract research and
development revenue being derived from fully funded contracts,
favorable adjustments related to closing out prior year
government rate audits and increased product shipments. We
expect the gross margin for the Imaging Instrumentation business
in 2008 to improve over 2007, primarily as a result of the
projected increase in product sales, which typically carry
higher gross margins.
Research
and development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
% Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2007 vs. 2006
|
|
2006 vs. 2005
|
|
|
(In thousands, except percentages)
|
|
Research and development expense
|
|
$
|
40,137
|
|
|
$
|
30,036
|
|
|
$
|
14,384
|
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
|
|
109
|
%
|
% of net revenues
|
|
|
18.6
|
%
|
|
|
11.6
|
%
|
|
|
10.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development expense consists primarily of prototype
materials, salaries and related costs of employees engaged in
ongoing research, design and development activities for disk
sputtering equipment, semiconductor equipment and Imaging
Instrumentation products. Research and development costs for
2007 and 2006 included $2.1 million and $1.4 million
of equity-based compensation expense, respectively.
Research and development spending increased in Equipment during
2007 as compared to 2006 and in 2006 as compared to 2005. The
increase in Equipment spending was due primarily to spending on
the development of our Lean
Etchtm
product line to serve the semiconductor market and, to a lesser
extent, spending for continuing development of our disk
sputtering products. Imaging Instrumentation research and
development spending declined slightly in 2007 after a
significant increase in 2006 as compared to 2005.
Engineering headcount has grown from 89 at the end of 2005 to
129 at the end of 2006, and to 141 at the end of 2007. We expect
that research and development spending will decrease slightly in
2008 due primarily to a reduction in expenditures related to the
development of our Lean
Etchtm
product line.
Research and development expenses do not include costs of
$7.4 million, $6.1 million, and $5.3 million, in
2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively, which are related to
contract research and development and included in cost of net
revenues.
Selling,
general and administrative
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
% Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
2007 vs. 2006
|
|
2006 vs. 2005
|
|
|
(In thousands, except percentages)
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expense
|
|
$
|
28,470
|
|
|
$
|
22,924
|
|
|
$
|
14,477
|
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
|
58
|
%
|
% of net revenues
|
|
|
13.2
|
%
|
|
|
8.8
|
%
|
|
|
10.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expense consists primarily
of selling, marketing, customer support, financial and
management costs and also includes production of customer
samples, travel, liability insurance,
31
legal and professional services and bad debt expense. All
domestic sales and international sales of disk sputtering
products in Asia, with the exception of Japan, are typically
made by Intevacs direct sales force, whereas sales in
Japan of disk sputtering products and other products are
typically made by our Japanese distributor, Matsubo, who
provides services such as sales, installation, warranty and
customer support. We also have subsidiaries in Singapore and in
Hong Kong, along with field offices in Japan, Malaysia, Korea
and Shenzhen, China to support our equipment customers in Asia.
Selling, general and administrative costs for 2007 and 2006
included $3.5 million and $1.5 million of equity-based
compensation expense, respectively.
The increase in selling, general and administrative spending in
2007 was primarily the result of increases in costs related to
business development, customer service and support in both the
Equipment and Imaging Instrumentation businesses, legal expenses
associated with the Unaxis litigation and higher equity-based
compensation expense. Our selling, general and administrative
headcount increased from 63 at the end of 2005 to 77 at the end
of 2006, and to 111 at the end of 2007. The increase in selling,
general and administrative spending in 2006 was primarily the
result of increases in costs related to business development,
customer service and support in the Equipment business, legal
expenses associated with the Unaxis litigation and provisions
for employee profit sharing and bonus plans. We expect that
selling, general and administrative expenses will increase in
2008 over the amount spent in 2007 due primarily to a projected
increase in costs related to customer service and support for
the Equipment business and the addition of key business
development personnel in the Imaging Instrumentation business.
This will be partially offset by lower provisions for employee
profit sharing and bonus plans, resulting from our expectations
of lower profits in 2008.
Interest
income and other, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2007 vs. 2006
|
|
|
2006 vs. 2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except percentages)
|
|
|
Interest income and other, net
|
|
$
|
8,142
|
|
|
$
|
3,778
|
|
|
$
|
1,855
|
|
|
|
116
|
%
|
|
|
104
|
%
|
Interest income and other, net in 2007 included a
$1.5 million gain on the redemption of our preferred
interest in 601 California Avenue LLC, $6.5 million of
interest income on investments and $129,000 in net other income.
The increase in interest income in 2007 was driven by higher
interest rates on our investments and a higher average invested
balance. Interest income and other, net in 2006 consisted of
$390,000 of dividends from 601 California Avenue LLC,
$3.5 million of interest income on investments and $113,000
in net other expense. Interest income and other, net in 2005
consisted of $390,000 of dividends from 601 California Avenue
LLC, $1.3 million of interest income on investments and
$155,000 of foreign currency gains and losses and other income.
We expect interest income and other, net to decrease in 2008 due
to the absence of the one-time real estate gain in 2007 and a
reduction in interest income due primarily to a reduction in
interest rates.
Provision
for income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2007 vs. 2006
|
|
|
2006 vs. 2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except percentages)
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
$
|
8,233
|
|
|
$
|
5,079
|
|
|
$
|
421
|
|
|
|
62
|
%
|
|
|
1106
|
%
|
In 2007, we accrued income tax using an effective tax rate of
23.1% of pretax income. This rate is based on an estimate of our
annual tax rate calculated in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 109, Accounting
for Income Taxes. Our tax rate differs from the applicable
statutory rates due primarily to the utilization of deferred and
current credits and the effect of permanent differences and
adjustments of prior permanent differences. Our deferred tax
asset of $10.1 million is partially offset by a valuation
allowance, resulting in a net deferred tax asset of
$7.3 million at December 31, 2007. The valuation
allowance is attributable to state temporary differences and
deferred research and development credits that are not
realizable in 2008. We expect our effective tax rate to decrease
in 2008 due to research and development credits generated in
2008, which will be utilized against a lower level of pre-tax
profits.
In 2006, we accrued income tax using an effective tax rate of
12% of pretax income. Our net deferred tax asset totaled
$4.6 million at December 31, 2006, net of a valuation
allowance of $2.8 million.
32
For 2005, we accrued income tax using an effective tax rate of
2.5% of pretax income. Our net deferred tax asset totaled zero
at December 31, 2005, net of a $15.0 million valuation
allowance.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
At December 31, 2007, we had $140.7 million in cash,
cash equivalents, and investments compared to
$103.0 million at December 31, 2006. During fiscal
2007, cash and cash equivalents decreased by $11.8 million,
due to the net purchase of investments and fixed assets, and the
acquisitions of the assets and certain liabilities of DeltaNu,
LLC and Creative Display Systems, LLC, partially offset by the
cash provided by operating and financing activities.
Cash provided by operating activities in 2007 totaled
$40.5 million compared to $55.2 million in 2006. The
decrease in cash provided from operating activities was due
primarily to the reduction in net income in 2007, adjusted to
exclude the effect of non-cash charges including depreciation
and equity-based compensation, and to decreases in accounts
payable and customer advances, partially offset by decreases in
accounts receivable and inventory. Accounts receivable totaled
$14.1 million at December 31, 2007 compared to
$40.0 million at December 31, 2006. The decrease of
$25.8 million in the receivable balance was due primarily
to the reduction in revenue in the second half of 2007 as
compared to 2006. Net inventories decreased by
$15.8 million during 2007 due primarily to decreases in
both raw materials and
work-in-progress.
The higher level of net inventory at December 31, 2006 was
used to support the twenty-four systems in backlog at that time.
Accounts payable totaled $7.7 million at December 31,
2007 compared to $16.0 million at December 31, 2006.
The decrease of $8.3 million relates to the decrease in
inventory purchases and a slowdown in our business. Accrued
payroll and related liabilities decreased by $3.2 million
during 2007 due to a decrease in accruals for bonuses and
employee profit-sharing. Other accrued liabilities totaled
$5.5 million at December 31, 2007 compared to
$6.6 million at December 31, 2006. The decrease of
$1.2 million relates primarily to reductions in accruals
for our warranty and tax obligations. Customer advances
decreased by $21.9 million during 2007. The decrease was
driven by the reduction in backlog at December 31, 2007.
Investing activities in 2007 used cash of $59.2 million.
Purchases of investments, net of proceeds from sales and
maturities, totaled $49.2 million, and capital expenditures
in 2007 totaled $5.7 million. During 2007, we invested
$6.7 million in the acquisitions of DeltaNu, LLC and
Creative Display Systems, LLC, and we sold our investment in 601
California Avenue LLC. Our investing activities in 2006 used
cash of $37.3 million as the result of the
$28.9 million net purchase of investments and
$8.4 million in capital expenditures.
Financing activities provided cash of $6.9 million in 2007.
The sale of Intevac common stock to our employees through our
employee benefit plans provided $3.9 million and we
realized tax benefits of $3.0 million from equity-based
compensation. Financing activities provided cash of
$6.2 million in 2006 due to the sale of Intevac common
stock to our employees through our employee benefit plans and
tax benefits from equity-based compensation.
We issued $4.0 million in notes payable related to the
acquisition of DeltaNu, LLC, which are discounted to
$3.9 million on the accompanying Consolidated Balance
Sheet. $2 million of the notes are scheduled to be repaid
on each of January 31, 2008 and 2009.
We have generated operating income for the last three years,
after incurring annual operating losses from 1998 through 2004.
We currently expect to incur a slight operating loss in 2008.
We believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and
short-term investments will be sufficient to meet our cash
requirements for the foreseeable future. We intend to undertake
approximately $8 million in capital expenditures during the
next 12 months.
33
Contractual
Obligations
In the normal course of business, we enter into various
contractual obligations that will be settled in cash. These
obligations consist primarily of operating lease and purchase
orders placed in the normal course of business. The expected
future cash flows required to meet these obligations as of
December 31, 2007 are shown in the table below. More
information on the operating lease obligations is available in
Part II, Item 8, Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
< 1 Year
|
|
|
1-3 Years
|
|
|
3-5 Years
|
|
|
> 5 Years
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Operating lease obligations
|
|
$
|
10,530
|
|
|
$
|
2,534
|
|
|
$
|
4,906
|
|
|
$
|
3,054
|
|
|
$
|
36
|
|
Purchase obligations
|
|
|
9,392
|
|
|
|
9,392
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
19,922
|
|
|
$
|
11,926
|
|
|
$
|
4,906
|
|
|
$
|
3,054
|
|
|
$
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
As of December 31, 2007, we did not have any material
off-balance sheet arrangements (as defined in
Item 303(a)(4)(ii) of
Regulation S-K).
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
Interest rate risk. Our exposure to market
risk for changes in interest rates relates primarily to our
investment portfolio. We do not use derivative financial
instruments in our investment portfolio. We place our
investments with high quality credit issuers and, by policy,
limit the amount of credit exposure to any one issuer.
Short-term investments typically consist of investments in A1/P1
rated commercial paper, auction rate securities and debt
instruments issued by the U.S. government and its agencies.
The table below presents principal amounts and related
weighted-average interest rates by year of maturity for our
investment portfolio at December 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Beyond
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed rate amounts
|
|
$
|
7,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,750
|
|
|
$
|
7,750
|
|
Weighted-average rate
|
|
|
4.28
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Variable rate amounts
|
|
$
|
7,973
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
7,973
|
|
|
$
|
7,976
|
|
Weighted-average rate
|
|
|
4.82
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed rate amounts
|
|
$
|
110,985
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
110,985
|
|
|
$
|
111,019
|
|
Weighted-average rate
|
|
|
5.53
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed rate amounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,009
|
|
|
$
|
2,010
|
|
Weighted-average rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.43
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment portfolio
|
|
$
|
126,708
|
|
|
$
|
2,009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
128,717
|
|
|
$
|
128,755
|
|
Due to the short-term nature of the substantial portion of our
investments, we believe that we do not have any material
exposure to changes in the fair value of our investment
portfolio as a result of changes in interest rates. Refer to
footnote 13 of Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements for
current issues around our investments in Auction Rate Securities.
Foreign exchange risk. From time to time, we
enter into foreign currency forward exchange contracts to
economically hedge certain of our anticipated foreign currency
transaction, translation and re-measurement exposures. The
objective of these contracts is to minimize the impact of
foreign currency exchange rate movements on our operating
results. We had no foreign currency forward exchange contracts
during any of the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and
2005.
34
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
INTEVAC,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Contents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
|
|
36
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheets
|
|
|
37
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income
|
|
|
38
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Stockholders Equity
|
|
|
39
|
|
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
40
|
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
41
|
|
35
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Board of Directors and Stockholders
Intevac, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of Intevac, Inc.
(a Delaware corporation) and subsidiaries (collectively, the
Company) as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and
the related consolidated statements of income and comprehensive
income, stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of
the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007.
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. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred
to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of Intevac, Inc. as of December 31, 2007 and 2006,
and the results of their operations and their cash flows for
each of the three years in the period ended December 31,
2007 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America.
Our audits were conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion
on the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole.
The Schedule II is presented for purposes of additional
analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial
statements. This schedule has been subjected to the auditing
procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial
statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material
respects in relation to the basic financial statements taken as
a whole.
As discussed in Note 10 to the consolidated financial
statements, effective January 1, 2007, the Company adopted
the provisions of Financial Accounting Standards Board
Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States),
Intevac, Inc.s internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (COSO) and our report dated March 14, 2008,
expressed an unqualified opinion on the effective operation of
internal control over financial reporting.
San Jose, California
March 14, 2008
36
INTEVAC,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
27,673
|
|
|
$
|
39,440
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
|
110,985
|
|
|
|
55,595
|
|
Trade and other accounts receivable, net of allowances of $57
and $143 at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively
|
|
|
14,142
|
|
|
|
39,927
|
|
Inventories, including $2,276 and $5,765 held at customer
locations at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively
|
|
|
22,133
|
|
|
|
37,942
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
4,162
|
|
|
|
2,506
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
3,609
|
|
|
|
3,269
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
182,704
|
|
|
|
178,679
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, at cost:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
12,631
|
|
|
|
11,062
|
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
27,185
|
|
|
|
23,926
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,816
|
|
|
|
34,988
|
|
Less accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
24,414
|
|
|
|
21,442
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,402
|
|
|
|
13,546
|
|
Long-term investments
|
|
|
2,009
|
|
|
|
8,000
|
|
Investment in 601 California Avenue LLC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,431
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
7,905
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other intangible assets, net of amortization of $218
|
|
|
1,805
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes and other long term assets
|
|
|
5,588
|
|
|
|
3,347
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
215,413
|
|
|
$
|
206,003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable
|
|
$
|
1,992
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
7,678
|
|
|
|
15,994
|
|
Accrued payroll and related liabilities
|
|
|
8,610
|
|
|
|
11,769
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
5,454
|
|
|
|
6,612
|
|
Customer advances
|
|
|
4,340
|
|
|
|
26,243
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
28,074
|
|
|
|
60,618
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
278
|
|
|
|
1,075
|
|
Long-term notes payable
|
|
|
1,898
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Undesignated preferred stock, $0.001 par value,
10,000 shares authorized, no shares issued and outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.001 par value at December 31, 2007
and no par value at December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized shares 50,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issued and outstanding shares 21,591 and 21,188 at
December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
99,468
|
|
Additional
paid-in-capital
|
|
|
120,056
|
|
|
|
7,319
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
|
571
|
|
|
|
354
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
64,514
|
|
|
|
37,169
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
185,163
|
|
|
|
144,310
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
215,413
|
|
|
$
|
206,003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
37
INTEVAC,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
Net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Systems and components
|
|
$
|
202,292
|
|
|
$
|
250,158
|
|
|
$
|
130,168
|
|
Technology development
|
|
|
13,542
|
|
|
|
9,717
|
|
|
|
7,061
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net revenues
|
|
|
215,834
|
|
|
|
259,875
|
|
|
|
137,229
|
|
Cost of net revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Systems and components
|
|
|
111,514
|
|
|
|
151,287
|
|
|
|
87,525
|
|
Technology development
|
|
|
7,415
|
|
|
|
6,102
|
|
|
|
5,253
|
|
Inventory provisions
|
|
|
862
|
|
|
|
1,527
|
|
|
|
873
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of net revenues
|
|
|
119,791
|
|
|
|
158,916
|
|
|
|
93,651
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
96,043
|
|
|
|
100,959
|
|
|
|
43,578
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
40,137
|
|
|
|
30,036
|
|
|
|
14,384
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
28,470
|
|
|
|
22,924
|
|
|
|
14,477
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
68,607
|
|
|
|
52,960
|
|
|
|
28,861
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
27,436
|
|
|
|
47,999
|
|
|
|
14,717
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
6,544
|
|
|
|
3,501
|
|
|
|
1,303
|
|
Other income
|
|
|
1,598
|
|
|
|
277
|
|
|
|
552
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
|
35,578
|
|
|
|
51,777
|
|
|
|
16,572
|
|
Provision for income taxes
|
|
|
8,233
|
|
|
|
5,079
|
|
|
|
421
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
27,345
|
|
|
$
|
46,698
|
|
|
$
|
16,151
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income, net of income taxes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
116
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
$
|
27,562
|
|
|
$
|
46,814
|
|
|
$
|
16,136
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1.28
|
|
|
$
|
2.22
|
|
|
$
|
0.79
|
|
Shares used in per share amounts
|
|
|
21,447
|
|
|
|
21,015
|
|
|
|
20,462
|
|
Diluted income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
1.23
|
|
|
$
|
2.13
|
|
|
$
|
0.76
|
|
Shares used in per share amounts
|
|
|
22,150
|
|
|
|
21,936
|
|
|
|
21,202
|
|
See accompanying notes.
38
INTEVAC,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
(Accumulated
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Deficit)
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2004
|
|
|
20,182
|
|
|
$
|
93,634
|
|
|
$
|
1,168
|
|
|
$
|
253
|
|
|
$
|
(25,680
|
)
|
|
$
|
69,375
|
|
Shares issued in connection with:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
358
|
|
|
|
1,856
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,856
|
|
Employee stock purchase plan
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
488
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
488
|
|
Compensation expense in form of stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,151
|
|
|
|
16,151
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2005
|
|
|
20,669
|
|
|
$
|
95,978
|
|
|
$
|
1,187
|
|
|
$
|
238
|
|
|
$
|
(9,529
|
)
|
|
$
|
87,874
|
|
Shares issued in connection with:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
360
|
|
|
|
2,666
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,666
|
|
Employee stock purchase plan
|
|
|
159
|
|
|
|
824
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
824
|
|
Income tax benefits realized from activity in employee stock
plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,707
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,707
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,425
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,425
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
116
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
116
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,698
|
|
|
|
46,698
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
21,188
|
|
|
$
|
99,468
|
|
|
$
|
7,319
|
|
|
$
|
354
|
|
|
$
|
37,169
|
|
|
$
|
144,310
|
|
Shares issued in connection with:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
313
|
|
|
|
2,141
|
|
|
|
353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,494
|
|
Employee stock purchase plan
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
671
|
|
|
|
704
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,375
|
|
Reclassification of par value for
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Delaware reincorporation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(102,258
|
)
|
|
|
102,258
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax benefits realized from activity in employee stock
plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,009
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,379
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,379
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
251
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,345
|
|
|
|
27,345
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
21,591
|
|
|
$
|
22
|
|
|
$
|
120,056
|
|
|
$
|
571
|
|
|
$
|
64,514
|
|
|
$
|
185,163
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
39
INTEVAC,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
27,345
|
|
|
$
|
46,698
|
|
|
$
|
16,151
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash and cash
equivalents provided by operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation & amortization
|
|
|
4,203
|
|
|
|
2,846
|
|
|
|
2,150
|
|
Net accretion of investment premiums and discounts
|
|
|
(175
|
)
|
|
|
(264
|
)
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
Amortization of intangible assets
|
|
|
218
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory provisions
|
|
|
862
|
|
|
|
1,527
|
|
|
|
873
|
|
Equity-based compensation
|
|
|
6,379
|
|
|
|
3,425
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(1,654
|
)
|
|
|
(4,581
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Tax benefit from equity-based compensation
|
|
|
(3,009
|
)
|
|
|
(2,707
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on disposal of equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Changes in assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
26,687
|
|
|
|
2,928
|
|
|
|
(38,081
|
)
|
Inventory
|
|
|
15,686
|
|
|
|
(14,590
|
)
|
|
|
(10,354
|
)
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets
|
|
|
(2,537
|
)
|
|
|
(1,903
|
)
|
|
|
(1,661
|
)
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(8,841
|
)
|
|
|
8,904
|
|
|
|
5,402
|
|
Accrued payroll and other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
(2,673
|
)
|
|
|
9,762
|
|
|
|
7,645
|
|
Customer advances
|
|
|
(22,027
|
)
|
|
|
3,107
|
|
|
|
19,303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments
|
|
|
13,119
|
|
|
|
8,493
|
|
|
|
(14,755
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash and cash equivalents provided by operating activities
|
|
|
40,464
|
|
|
|
55,191
|
|
|
|
1,396
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of investments
|
|
|
(175,624
|
)
|
|
|
(152,280
|
)
|
|
|
(100,140
|
)
|
Proceeds from sales and maturities of investments
|
|
|
126,400
|
|
|
|
123,425
|
|
|
|
98,350
|
|
Sale of investment in 601 California Avenue LLC
|
|
|
2,431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of DeltaNu, LLC, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
(1,913
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition of Creative Display Systems, LLC, net of cash
acquired
|
|
|
(4,782
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase of equipment
|
|
|
(5,735
|
)
|
|
|
(8,423
|
)
|
|
|
(4,140
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash and cash equivalents used in investing activities
|
|
|
(59,223
|
)
|
|
|
(37,278
|
)
|
|
|
(5,930
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock
|
|
|
3,869
|
|
|
|
3,490
|
|
|
|
2,344
|
|
Tax benefit from equity-based compensation plans
|
|
|
3,009
|
|
|
|
2,707
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash and cash equivalents provided by financing activities
|
|
|
6,878
|
|
|
|
6,197
|
|
|
|
2,344
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash
|
|
|
114
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(11,767
|
)
|
|
|
24,185
|
|
|
|
(2,200
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
39,440
|
|
|
|
15,255
|
|
|
|
17,455
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
27,673
|
|
|
$
|
39,440
|
|
|
$
|
15,255
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid (received) for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
$
|
11,644
|
|
|
$
|
5,722
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
Income tax refund
|
|
|
(259
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other non-cash changes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable issued for the acquisition of DeltaNu, LLC
|
|
$
|
3,890
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
See accompanying notes.
40
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
|
|
1.
|
Business
and Nature of Operations
|
Intevacs business consists of two reportable segments:
Equipment: Intevac is a leader in the design,
manufacture and marketing of high-productivity lean
manufacturing systems and has been producing Lean
Thinking platforms since 1994. We are the leading supplier
of magnetic media sputtering equipment to the hard disk drive
industry and offer leading-edge, high-productivity etch systems
to the semiconductor industry.
Imaging Instrumentation: Intevac is a leader
in the development of compact, cost-effective, high-sensitivity
digital-optical products for the capture and display of
low-light images and the optical analysis of materials. We
provide sensors, cameras and systems for commercial applications
in the inspection, medical, scientific and security industries
and for government applications such as night vision and
long-range target identification.
The majority of our revenue is currently derived from our
Equipment business, and we expect that the majority of our
revenues for the next several years will continue to be derived
from our Equipment business.
|
|
2.
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies
|
Basis
of Presentation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of
Intevac and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All inter-company
transactions and balances have been eliminated.
Revenue
Recognition
We recognize revenue using guidance from SEC Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 104, Revenue Recognition. Our
policy allows revenue recognition when persuasive evidence of an
arrangement exists, delivery has occurred or services have been
rendered, the price is fixed or determinable, and collectibility
is reasonably assured.
Certain of our system sales with customer acceptance provisions
are accounted for as multiple-element arrangements. If we have
previously met defined customer acceptance levels with the
specific type of system, then we recognize revenue for the fair
market value of the system upon shipment and transfer of title,
and recognize revenue for the fair market value of installation
and acceptance services when those services are completed. We
estimate the fair market value of installation and acceptance
services based on our actual historical experience of the
relative cost of such installation and acceptance services.. For
systems that have generally not been demonstrated to meet
product specifications prior to shipment, revenue recognition is
usually deferred until customer acceptance. In the event that
our customer chooses not to complete installation and
acceptance, and our obligations under the contract to complete
installation, acceptance or any other tasks, with the exception
of warranty obligations, have been fully discharged, then we
recognize any remaining revenue to the extent that
collectibility under the contract is reasonably assured.
Accounting Treatment for Systems. During the
period that a system is undergoing customer acceptance (either
distributor or end user), the value of the system remains in
inventory, and any payments received, or amounts invoiced,
related to the system are included in customer advances. When
revenue is recognized on the system, the inventory is charged to
cost of net revenues, the customer advance is liquidated, and
the customer is billed for the unpaid balance of the system
revenue.
In some instances, hardware that is not essential to the
functioning of the system may be delivered after acceptance of
the system. In these cases, we estimate the fair market value of
the non-essential hardware as if it had been sold on a
stand-alone basis, and defer recognizing revenue on that value
until the hardware is delivered.
Occasionally, we are asked by our customers to delay delivery of
products that they have accepted, and to temporarily hold the
product at our facility. To determine revenue recognition when
the product is not immediately
41
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
shipped to the customer, we apply the criteria outlined in the
SEC Enforcement Release No. 108, which is consistent with
APB Statement 4, paragraph 150. All of the criteria must be
met in order for revenue to be recognized.
Other Systems and Non-System Revenue
Recognition. Revenues for systems without
installation and acceptance provisions, as well as revenues from
technology upgrades, spare parts, consumables and products built
by the Imaging Instrumentation business are recognized when
title passes to our customer. In certain cases, technology
upgrade sales are accounted for as multiple-element
arrangements, usually split between delivery of the parts and
installation on the customers systems. In these cases, we
recognize revenue for the fair market value of the parts upon
shipment and transfer of title, and recognize revenue for the
fair market value of installation services when those services
are completed. Service and maintenance contract revenue, which
to date has been insignificant, is recognized ratably over
applicable contract periods or as the service is performed.
Obligations After Shipment. Our shipping terms
are generally FOB shipping point, but in some cases are FOB
destination. For systems sold directly to the end user, our
obligations remaining after shipment typically include
installation, end user factory acceptance and warranty. For
systems sold to distributors, typically the distributor assumes
responsibility for installation and end user customer
acceptance. In some cases, the distributor will assume some or
all of the warranty liability. For products other than systems
and system upgrades, warranty is the only obligation we have
after shipment.
In certain cases, we sell limited rights to our intellectual
property. Revenue from the sale of any intellectual property
license will generally be recognized at the inception of the
license term.
Technology Development Revenue Recognition. We
perform research and development work under various
government-sponsored research contracts. Generally these
contracts are best efforts cost-plus-fixed-fee
(CPFF) contracts or firm fixed-price
(FFP) contracts. On best efforts CPFF contracts we
typically commit to perform certain research and development
efforts up to an agreed upon amount. In connection with these
contracts, we receive funding on an incremental basis up to a
ceiling. On FFP contracts we typically commit to perform certain
development and production efforts for a fixed price.
Our CPFF contracts are accounted for under ARB No. 43,
Chapter 11, Section A, which addresses
Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee Contracts. The contracts are all cost-type,
with financial terms that are a mixture of fixed fee, no fee and
cost sharing. Revenue on these contracts is recognized in
accordance with contract terms, typically as costs are incurred.
In the event that total cost incurred under a particular
contract over-runs its agreed upon amount, we may be liable for
the additional costs.
Our FFP contracts are accounted for under
SOP 81-1
Accounting for Performance of Construction-Type and
Certain Production-Type Contracts. Revenue on FFP
contracts is generally recognized on the percentage-of-
completion method based on costs incurred in relation to the
total estimated costs. Provisions for estimated losses on FFP
research contracts are recorded in the period in which such
losses are determined.
The deliverables under each CPFF or FFP contract range from
providing reports to providing hardware. In the majority of the
contracts there is no obligation for either party to continue
the program once the funds have been expended. The efforts can
be terminated at any time for convenience, in which case we
would be reimbursed for our actual incurred costs, plus fee, if
applicable, for the completed effort. We own the entire right,
title and interest to each invention discovered under the
contract, unless we specifically give up that right. The
U.S. Government has a
paid-up
license to use any invention or intellectual property developed
under government funded contracts for government purposes only.
In addition, we have, from time to time, negotiated with third
parties to fund a portion of our costs in return for granting
them a joint interest in the technology rights developed
pursuant to the contract.
Trade
Receivables and Doubtful Accounts
We evaluate the collectibility of trade receivables on an
ongoing basis and provide reserves against potential losses when
appropriate. Management analyzes historical bad debts, customer
concentrations, customer credit
42
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
worthiness, changes in customer payment tendencies and current
economic trends when evaluating the adequacy of the allowance
for doubtful accounts. Customer accounts are written off against
the allowance when the amount is deemed uncollectible.
Included in trade receivables are unbilled receivables related
to government contracts of $1.9 million and
$1.0 million at December 31, 2007 and
December 31, 2006, respectively, which includes $250,000
and $313,000 of fee retention, respectively.
Warranty
We provide for the estimated cost of warranty when revenue is
recognized. Our warranty is per contract terms and for our
systems the warranty typically ranges between 12 and
24 months from customer acceptance. For systems sold
through our distributor, we offer a 3 month warranty. The
remainder of any warranty period is the responsibility of the
distributor. During this warranty period any defective
non-consumable parts are replaced and installed at no charge to
the customer. The warranty period on consumable parts is limited
to their reasonable usable lives. We use estimated repair or
replacement costs along with our historical warranty experience
to determine our warranty obligation. We exercise judgment in
determining the underlying estimates. We also provide for
estimated retrofit costs, which typically relate to design
changes or improvements we identify. On a
case-by-case
basis, we determine whether or not to retrofit systems in the
field at no charge to the customer.
On the Consolidated Balance Sheet, the short-term portion of the
warranty provision is included in other accrued liabilities,
while the long-term portion is included in other long-term
liabilities. The expense associated with product warranties
issued or adjusted is included in cost of net revenues on the
Consolidated Statement of Income and Comprehensive Income.
The following table displays the activity in the warranty
provision account for 2007 and 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Beginning balance
|
|
$
|
5,283
|
|
|
$
|
3,399
|
|
Expenditures incurred under warranties
|
|
|
(4,158
|
)
|
|
|
(3,695
|
)
|
Accruals for product warranties issued during the reporting
period
|
|
|
2,137
|
|
|
|
4,354
|
|
Adjustments to previously existing warranty accruals
|
|
|
(170
|
)
|
|
|
1,225
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance
|
|
$
|
3,092
|
|
|
$
|
5,283
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table displays the balance sheet classification of
the warranty provision account at December 31, 2007 and
2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
$
|
2,814
|
|
|
$
|
4,208
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
278
|
|
|
|
1,075
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total warranty provision
|
|
$
|
3,092
|
|
|
$
|
5,283
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Guarantees
We have entered into agreements with customers and suppliers
that include limited intellectual property indemnification
obligations that are customary in the industry. These guarantees
generally require us to compensate the other party for certain
damages and costs incurred as a result of third party
intellectual property claims arising from these transactions.
The nature of the intellectual property indemnification
obligations prevents us from making a reasonable estimate of the
maximum potential amount we could be required to pay our
customers and
43
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
suppliers. Historically, we have not made any significant
indemnification payments under such agreements, and no amount
has been accrued in the accompanying consolidated financial
statements with respect to these indemnification obligations.
Income
Taxes
We account for income taxes in accordance with Statement of
Financial Accounting Standard No. 109, Accounting for
Income Taxes, (SFAS 109), which requires
that deferred tax assets and liabilities be recognized using
enacted tax rates for the effect of temporary differences
between book and tax bases of recorded assets and liabilities.
SFAS 109 also requires that deferred tax assets be reduced
by a valuation allowance if it is more likely than not that a
portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized.
On a quarterly basis, we provide for income taxes based upon an
annual effective income tax rate. The effective tax rate is
highly dependent upon the level of our projected earnings, the
geographic composition of worldwide earnings, tax regulations
governing each region, net operating loss carry-forwards,
availability of tax credits and the effectiveness of our tax
planning strategies. We carefully monitor the changes in many
factors and adjust our effective income tax rate on a timely
basis. If actual results differ from the estimates, this could
have a material effect on our business, financial condition and
results of operations. For example, as our projected level of
earnings changed throughout 2007 and we benefitted from various
tax planning strategies, we decreased the annual effective tax
rate from 31.6% at the end of the first quarter, to 26.9% at the
end of the second quarter, to 24.0% at the end of the third
quarter and to 23.1% at the end of the fourth quarter.
The calculation of tax liabilities involves significant judgment
in estimating the impact of uncertainties in the application of
complex tax laws. Resolution of these uncertainties in a manner
inconsistent with our expectations could have a material effect
on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We recognize accrued interest and penalties related to
unrecognized tax benefits in the provision for income taxes.
Customer
Advances
Customer advances generally represent nonrefundable deposits
invoiced by the Company in connection with receiving customer
purchase orders and other events preceding acceptance of
systems. Customer advances related to products that have not
been shipped to customers and included in accounts receivable
were $0 and $17.1 million at December 31, 2007 and
December 31, 2006, respectively.
Cash,
Cash Equivalents and Short-term Investments
Our investment portfolio consists of cash, cash equivalents and
investments in debt securities and municipal bonds. We consider
all highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months or
less when purchased to be cash equivalents. Investments in debt
securities and municipal bonds consists principally of highly
rated debt instruments with maturities generally between one and
25 months.
44
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
We account for our investments in debt securities and auction
rate securities in accordance with Statement of Accounting
Standards No. 115 Accounting for Certain Investments
in Debt and Equity Securities, which requires certain
securities to be categorized as either trading,
available-for-sale or held-to-maturity. Available-for-sale
securities, consisting solely of Auction Rate Securities, are
carried at fair value, with unrealized gains and losses recorded
within other comprehensive income (loss) as a separate component
of stockholders equity. Auction Rate Securities have
long-term underlying maturities (ranging from 20 to
40 years), however the market has historically been highly
liquid and the interest rates reset every 7 or 28 days. Our
intent is not to hold these securities to maturity, but rather
to use the interest rate reset feature to sell securities to
provide liquidity as needed. Our practice is to invest in these
securities for higher yields compared to cash equivalents.
Held-to-maturity securities are carried at amortized cost. We
have no trading securities. The cost of investment securities
sold is determined by the specific identification method.
Interest income is recorded using an effective interest rate,
with the associated premium or discount amortized to interest
income. Realized gains and losses and declines in value judged
to be other than temporary, if any, on available for sales
securities are included in earnings. The table below presents
the amortized principal amount, major security type and
maturities for our investments in debt securities and Auction
Rate Securities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Amortized principal amount:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities issued by U.S. government agencies
|
|
$
|
29,744
|
|
|
$
|
8,000
|
|
Auction rate securities
|
|
|
81,450
|
|
|
|
53,595
|
|
Corporate debt securities
|
|
|
1,800
|
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments in debt securities
|
|
$
|
112,994
|
|
|
$
|
63,595
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments
|
|
$
|
110,985
|
|
|
$
|
55,595
|
|
Long-term investments
|
|
|
2,009
|
|
|
|
8,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments in debt securities
|
|
$
|
112,994
|
|
|
$
|
63,595
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximate fair value of investments in debt securities
|
|
$
|
113,029
|
|
|
$
|
63,585
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The change in the fair value of our investments is attributable
to changes in interest rates and not credit quality. In
accordance with
EITF 03-01,
we have the ability and intent to hold these investments until
fair value recovers, which may be maturity, and we do not
consider these investments to be other-than-temporarily impaired
at December 31, 2006. As of December 31, 2007, fair
value of our investments in debt securities exceeds book value,
and there is no impairment. In the first quarter of 2008, our
Auction Rate Securities have experienced multiple failed
auctions. See footnote 13 for further disclosure on the current
market situation.
Cash and cash equivalents represent cash accounts, money market
funds and investments with a duration of 90 days or less at
purchase. Cash balances held in foreign bank accounts totaled
$4.3 million and $1.6 million at December 31,
2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively. Included in
accounts payable is $2.1 million and $2.4 million of
book overdraft at December 31, 2007 and December 31,
2006, respectively.
Valuation
of Long-lived and Intangible Assets
We assess the impairment of identifiable intangibles and
long-lived assets whenever events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. Factors
we consider important which could trigger an impairment review
include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
significant underperformance relative to expected historical or
projected future operating results;
|
|
|
|
significant changes in the manner of our use of the acquired
assets or the strategy for our overall business; and
|
|
|
|
significant negative industry or economic trends.
|
45
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
When we determine that the carrying value of long-lived assets,
intangibles or goodwill may not be recoverable based upon the
existence of one or more of the above indicators of impairment,
we measure any impairment based on a projected discounted cash
flow method using a discount rate determined by our management
to be commensurate with the risk inherent in our current
business model.
Prototype
Costs
Prototype product costs that are not paid for under research and
development contracts and are in excess of fair market value are
charged to research and development expense.
Foreign
Exchange Contracts
We may enter into foreign currency forward exchange contracts to
hedge certain of our foreign currency transaction, translation
and re-measurement exposures. Our accounting policies for some
of these instruments are based on our designation of such
instruments as hedging transactions. Instruments not designated
as a hedge transaction will be marked to market at
the end of each accounting period. The criteria we use for
designating an instrument as a hedge include effectiveness in
exposure reduction and one-to-one matching of the derivative
financial instrument to the underlying transaction being hedged.
Gains and losses on foreign currency forward exchange contracts
that are designated and effective as hedges of existing
transactions are recognized in income in the same period as
losses and gains on the underlying transactions are recognized
and generally offset.
As of December 31, 2007 and 2006, we had no foreign
currency forward exchange contracts outstanding.
Foreign
Currency Translation
The functional currency of our foreign subsidiaries, with the
exception of Hong Kong, is the local currency of the country in
which the respective subsidiary operates. Hong Kongs
functional currency is the U.S. dollar. Assets and
liabilities recorded in foreign currencies are translated at
year-end exchange rates; revenues and expenses are translated at
average exchange rates during the year. The effect of foreign
currency translation adjustments are included in
stockholders equity as a component of Accumulated
other comprehensive income in the accompanying
consolidated balance sheets. The effects of foreign currency
transactions are included in Other income in the
determination of net income. Net gains or (losses) from foreign
currency transactions were $62,000, ($55,000) and $7,000 in
2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Financial
Instruments
The carrying amount of our short-term financial instruments
(cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments, accounts
receivable and certain other liabilities) approximates fair
value due to the short-term maturity of those instruments.
Inventories
In fiscal 2007, we changed our accounting method for valuing
inventory from a standard cost system, which approximated
first-in,
first-out, to the average actual cost method. The new method of
accounting for inventory is deemed preferable as we moved from a
system which approximated a GAAP valuation method to a GAAP
valuation method. The change in inventory accounting method did
not have a material impact on any of the periods presented
herein.
46
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Inventories are stated at the lower of average cost or market
and consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Raw materials
|
|
$
|
13,666
|
|
|
$
|
19,906
|
|
Work-in-progress
|
|
|
6,191
|
|
|
|
12,271
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
2,276
|
|
|
|
5,765
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
22,133
|
|
|
$
|
37,942
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finished goods inventory consists primarily of completed systems
at customer sites that are undergoing installation and
acceptance testing.
Inventory reserves included in the above numbers were
$7.8 million and $9.1 million at December 31,
2007 and 2006, respectively. Each quarter, we analyze our
inventory (raw materials,
work-in-progress
and finished goods) against the forecast demand for the next
12 months. Raw materials with no forecast requirements in
that period are considered excess and inventory provisions are
established to write those items down to zero net book value.
Work-in-progress
and finished goods inventories with no forecast requirements in
that period are typically written down to the lower of cost or
market. During this process, some inventory is identified as
having no future use or value to us and is disposed of against
the reserves.
The following table displays the activity in the inventory
provision account for 2007 and 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Beginning balance
|
|
$
|
9,128
|
|
|
$
|
10,988
|
|
New provisions in cost of sales
|
|
|
862
|
|
|
|
1,527
|
|
New provisions for refurbishment of consigned products
|
|
|
139
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
Disposals of inventory
|
|
|
(2,395
|
)
|
|
|
(3,355
|
)
|
Miscellaneous adjustments
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
(42
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance
|
|
$
|
7,750
|
|
|
$
|
9,128
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property,
Plant and Equipment
Equipment and leasehold improvements are carried at cost less
accumulated depreciation and amortization. Gains and losses on
dispositions are reflected in the Consolidated Statements of
Income and Comprehensive Income.
Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over the
estimated useful lives of the assets as follows:
|
|
|
Computers and software
|
|
3 years
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
5 years
|
Furniture
|
|
7 years
|
Vehicles
|
|
4 years
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
Remaining lease term
|
Comprehensive
Income
SFAS No. 130, Reporting Comprehensive
Income requires unrealized gains or losses on foreign
currency translation adjustments to be included in other
comprehensive income. As of December 31, 2007, the $571,000
47
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
balance of accumulated other comprehensive income is comprised
entirely of accumulated foreign currency translation adjustments.
Employee
Stock Plans
We have adopted equity-based compensation plans that provide for
the grant to employees of equity-based awards, including
incentive or non-statutory stock options, restricted stock,
stock appreciation rights, performance units and performance
shares. In addition, these plans provide for the grant of
non-statutory stock options to non-employee directors and
consultants. We also have an Employee Stock Purchase Plan, which
provides our employees with the opportunity to purchase Intevac
common stock at a discount through payroll deductions. See
Note 3 for a complete description of these plans and their
accounting treatment.
Financial
Presentation
Certain prior year amounts in the Consolidated Financial
Statements have been reclassified to conform to 2007
presentation. The reclassifications had no material effect on
total assets, liabilities, equity, net income (loss) or
comprehensive income (loss) previously reported.
Net
income per share
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and
diluted income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Numerator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Numerator for diluted earnings per share income
available to common stockholders
|
|
$
|
27,345
|
|
|
$
|
46,698
|
|
|
$
|
16,151
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for basic earnings per share
weighted-average shares
|
|
|
21,447
|
|
|
|
21,015
|
|
|
|
20,462
|
|
Effect of dilutive securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employee stock options(1)
|
|
|
703
|
|
|
|
921
|
|
|
|
740
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilutive potential common shares
|
|
|
703
|
|
|
|
921
|
|
|
|
740
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for diluted earnings per share adjusted
|
|
|
22,150
|
|
|
|
21,936
|
|
|
|
21,202
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Potentially dilutive securities, consisting of shares issuable
upon exercise of employee stock options, are excluded from the
calculation of diluted EPS if their effect would be
anti-dilutive. The weighted average number of employee stock
options excluded from the twelve-month periods ended
December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005 was 784,684, 426,606, and
226,804 respectively. |
Use of
Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America requires management to make estimates and assumptions
that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and
expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could
differ from those estimates, and such differences may be
material to the financial statements.
48
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
New
Accounting Pronouncements
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standard No. 157, Fair Value
Measurements (SFAS 157).
SFAS 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for
measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles
and expands disclosures about fair value measurements.
FAS 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007 for financial assets and liabilities, as
well as for any other assets and liabilities that are carried at
fair value on a recurring basis in financial statements. In
November 2007, the FASB provided a one year deferral for the
implementation of FAS 157 for other nonfinancial assets and
liabilities. We will adopt SFAS 157 beginning in the first
quarter of fiscal year 2008 and we do not expect SFAS 157
to have a material impact on our financial condition, results of
operations or cash flows.
In February 2008, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position
SFAS 157-1,
Application of FASB Statement No. 157 to FASB
Statement No. 13 and Other Accounting Pronouncements That
Address Fair Value Measurements for Purposes of Lease
Classification or Measurement under Statement 13
(FSP
FAS 157-1).
FSP
FAS 157-1
defers the effective date of SFAS 157 for all non-financial
assets and non-financial liabilities, except those that are
recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial
statements on a recurring basis. FSP
FAS 157-1
also excludes from the scope of SFAS 157 certain leasing
transactions accounted for under SFAS No. 13,
Accounting for Leases. We will adopt FSP
FAS 157-1
beginning in the first quarter of fiscal year 2008 and we do not
expect FSP
FAS 157-1
to have a material impact on our financial condition, results of
operations or cash flows.
In February 2007, the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 159, The Fair Value
Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities Including an amendment of FASB Statement
No. 115 (SFAS 159).
SFAS 159 permits entities to choose to measure many
financial instruments and certain other items at fair value. The
fair value option established by SFAS 159 permits all
entities to choose to measure eligible items at fair value at
specified election dates and report unrealized gains and losses
on items for which the fair value option has been elected in
earnings at each subsequent reporting date. SFAS 159 is
effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007. We do not expect to apply this fair value option to our
current financial instruments, and as such, do not expect
SFAS 159 to have a material impact on our financial
condition, results of operations or cash flows.
In December 2007 the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 141(R), Business
Combinations (SFAS 141R).
SFAS 141R retains the fundamental acquisition method of
accounting established in Statement 141; however, among other
things, SFAS 141R requires recognition of assets and
liabilities of non-controlling interests acquired, fair value
measurement of consideration and contingent consideration,
expense recognition for transaction costs and certain
integration costs, recognition of the fair value of
contingencies, and adjustments to income tax expense for changes
in an acquirers existing valuation allowances or uncertain
tax positions that result from the business combination.
SFAS 141R is effective for annual reporting periods
beginning after December 15, 2008 and shall be applied
prospectively. We have not yet completed our assessment of the
impact SFAS 141R will have on our financial condition,
results of operations or cash flows.
|
|
3.
|
Stock-Based
Compensation
|
On January 1, 2006, we adopted Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised 2004),
Share-Based Payment, (SFAS 123(R))
which requires the measurement and recognition of compensation
expense for all share-based payment awards made to employees and
directors, including equity awards related to the 2004 Equity
Incentive Plan (the 2004 Plan) and employee stock
purchases related to the 2003 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the
ESPP), based on estimated fair values.
SFAS 123(R) supersedes our previous accounting under
Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees (APB
25) for periods beginning in fiscal 2006. In March 2005,
the Securities and Exchange Commission issued Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 107 (SAB 107) relating
to SFAS 123(R). We have applied the provisions of
SAB 107 in our adoption of SFAS 123(R).
49
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
We adopted SFAS 123(R) using the modified prospective
transition method, which requires the application of the
accounting standard as of January 1, 2006, the first day of
our fiscal year 2006. Our Consolidated Financial Statements as
of and for the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 and
December 31, 2006 reflect the impact of SFAS 123(R).
In accordance with the modified prospective transition method,
our Consolidated Financial Statements for prior periods have not
been restated to reflect, and do not include, the impact of
SFAS 123(R). Stock-based compensation expense recognized
under SFAS 123(R) for the twelve months ended
December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006 was
$6.3 million and $3.4 million, respectively, which
consisted of stock-based compensation expense related to the
grant of stock options under the 2004 Plan and stock purchase
rights under the ESPP. There was $19,000 of stock-based
compensation expense related to the grant of stock options or
stock purchase rights recognized during the twelve months ended
December 31, 2005.
SFAS 123(R) requires companies to estimate the fair value
of share-based payment awards on the date of grant using an
option-pricing model. The value of the portion of the award that
is ultimately expected to vest is recognized as expense in our
Consolidated Statement of Income over the requisite service
period using the graded vesting attribution method. Prior to the
adoption of SFAS 123(R), we accounted for employee equity
awards and employee stock purchases using the intrinsic value
method in accordance with APB 25 as allowed under Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation (SFAS 123).
Under the intrinsic value method, no stock-based compensation
expense had been recognized in our Consolidated Statement of
Income, because the exercise price of our stock options granted
to employees and directors equaled the fair market value of the
underlying stock at the date of grant.
Stock-based compensation expense recognized during the period is
based on the value of the portion of share-based payment awards
that is ultimately expected to vest during the period.
Stock-based compensation expense recognized in our Consolidated
Statement of Income for the years ended December 31, 2007
and December 31, 2006 included compensation expense for
share-based payment awards granted prior to, but not yet vested
as of, December 31, 2005 based on the grant date fair value
estimated in accordance with the pro forma provisions of
SFAS 123 and compensation expense for the share-based
payment awards granted subsequent to December 31, 2005
based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with
the provisions of SFAS 123(R). As stock-based compensation
expense recognized in the Consolidated Statement of Income for
fiscal 2007 and 2006 is based on awards ultimately expected to
vest, it has been reduced for estimated annual forfeitures.
SFAS 123(R) requires forfeitures to be estimated at the
time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods
if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. In our pro
forma information required under SFAS 123 for the periods
prior to fiscal 2006, the Company accounted for forfeitures as
they occurred.
Descriptions
of Plans
2004
Equity Incentive Plan
In 2004, our Board of Directors and our stockholders approved
adoption of the 2004 Plan. The 2004 Plan serves as the successor
equity incentive program to our 1995 Stock Option/Stock Issuance
Plan (the 1995 Plan). Upon adoption of the 2004
Plan, all remaining shares available for issuance under the 1995
Plan were transferred to the 2004 Plan.
Our 2004 Plan is a broad-based, long-term retention program
intended to attract and retain qualified management and
employees, and align stockholder and employee interests. The
2004 Plan permits the grant of incentive or non-statutory stock
options, restricted stock, stock appreciation rights,
performance units and performance shares. Option price, vesting
period, and other terms are determined by the administrator of
the 2004 Plan, but the option price shall generally not be less
than 100% of the fair market value per share on the date of
grant. As of December 31, 2007, 3,227,707 shares of
common stock were authorized for future issuance under the 2004
Plan. Options granted under the 2004 Plan are exercisable upon
vesting and vest over periods of up to five years. Options
currently expire no later than ten years from the date of grant.
The 2004 Plan expires no later than March 10, 2014.
50
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
During the year ended December 31, 2007, we granted 750,000
stock options with an estimated total grant-date fair value of
$7.4 million, including 3,000 shares granted to a
consultant with a grant date fair value of $24,000. Of this
amount, we estimated that the stock-based compensation for
option grants that will be forfeited, and are therefore not
expected to vest, was $1.6 million.
2003
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
In 2003, our stockholders approved adoption of the ESPP, which
serves as the successor to the Employee Stock Purchase Plan
originally adopted in 1995. Upon adoption of the ESPP, all
shares available for issuance under the prior plan were
transferred to the ESPP. Our ESPP provides that eligible
employees may purchase our common stock through payroll
deductions at a price equal to 85% of the lower of the fair
market value at the beginning of the applicable offering period
or at the end of each applicable purchase interval. Offering
periods are generally two years in length, and consist of a
series of six-month purchase intervals. Eligible employees may
join the ESPP at the beginning of any six-month purchase
interval. Under the terms of the ESPP, employees can choose to
have up to 10% of their base earnings withheld to purchase our
common stock. Under the ESPP, we sold 90,018, 158,859 and
129,217 shares to employees in 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively. As of December 31, 2007, 297,919 shares
remained available for issuance under the 2003 ESPP.
During the year ended December 31, 2007, we granted
purchase rights with an estimated total grant-date value of
$2.0 million.
Impact
of the Adoption of SFAS 123(R)
The effect of recording stock-based compensation for the years
ended December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006 was as
follows (in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation by type of award:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options
|
|
$
|
5,517
|
|
|
$
|
2,803
|
|
Employee stock purchase plan
|
|
|
864
|
|
|
|
622
|
|
Amounts capitalized as inventory
|
|
|
(111
|
)
|
|
|
(69
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stock-based compensation
|
|
|
6,270
|
|
|
|
3,356
|
|
Tax effect on stock-based compensation
|
|
|
(1,451
|
)
|
|
|
(403
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net effect on net income
|
|
$
|
4,819
|
|
|
$
|
2,953
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
0.22
|
|
|
$
|
0.14
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
0.22
|
|
|
$
|
0.13
|
|
Approximately $180,000 and $69,000 of stock-based compensation
is included in inventory as of December 31, 2007 and
December 31, 2006, respectively. No stock-based
compensation was capitalized to inventory prior to our adoption
of the provisions of SFAS 123(R) in the first quarter of
2006.
Valuation
Assumptions
The fair value of share-based payment awards is estimated at the
grant date using the Black-Scholes Merton option valuation
model. The determination of fair value of share-based payment
awards on the date of grant using an option-pricing model is
affected by our stock price as well as assumptions regarding a
number of highly complex and subjective variables. These
variables include, but are not limited to, our expected stock
price volatility over the term of the awards, and actual
employee stock option exercise behavior.
51
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
We estimate the fair value of stock options consistent with the
provisions of SFAS 123(R), SAB No. 107 and our
prior period pro forma disclosures of net earnings, including
stock-based compensation expense (determined under a fair value
method as prescribed by SFAS 123). The weighted-average
estimated fair value of employee stock options granted during
the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 and
December 31, 2006 was $9.89 per share and $11.22 per share,
respectively. The weighted-average estimated fair value of
employee stock purchase rights granted pursuant to the ESPP
during the twelve months ended December 31, 2007 and
December 31, 2006 was $8.23 per share and $9.68 per share,
respectively. The fair value of each option and employee stock
purchase right grant is estimated on the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes Merton option valuation model with the following
weighted-average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Stock Options:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
66.67
|
%
|
|
|
74.44
|
%
|
Risk free interest rate
|
|
|
4.05
|
%
|
|
|
4.68
|
%
|
Expected term of options (in years)
|
|
|
4.49
|
|
|
|
4.71
|
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Stock Purchase Rights:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
63.15
|
%
|
|
|
59.25
|
%
|
Risk free interest rate
|
|
|
3.94
|
%
|
|
|
4.67
|
%
|
Expected term of purchase rights (in years)
|
|
|
1.97
|
|
|
|
1.92
|
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
None
|
|
The computation of the expected volatility assumptions used in
the Black-Scholes Merton calculations for new grants and
purchase rights is based on the historical volatility of our
stock price, measured over a period equal to the expected term
of the grant or purchase right. The risk-free interest rate is
based on the yield available on U.S. Treasury Strips with
an equivalent remaining term. The expected life of employee
stock options represents the weighted-average period that the
stock options are expected to remain outstanding and was
determined based on historical experience of similar awards,
giving consideration to the contractual terms of the stock-based
awards and vesting schedules. The expected life of purchase
rights is the period of time remaining in the current offering
period. The dividend yield assumption is based on our history of
not paying dividends and the assumption of not paying dividends
in the future.
52
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Stock
Plan Activity
2004
Equity Incentive Plan
A summary of activity under the above captioned plan is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Term
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
(Years)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Options outstanding at December 31, 2006
|
|
|
2,354,215
|
|
|
$
|
11.47
|
|
|
|
7.93
|
|
|
$
|
34,107,462
|
|
Options granted
|
|
|
750,000
|
|
|
$
|
17.73
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options forfeited
|
|
|
(203,483
|
)
|
|
$
|
15.74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercised
|
|
|
(312,878
|
)
|
|
$
|
7.97
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options outstanding at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
2,587,854
|
|
|
$
|
13.37
|
|
|
|
7.64
|
|
|
$
|
8,004,456
|
|
Vested and expected to vest at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
2,213,972
|
|
|
$
|
12.97
|
|
|
|
7.50
|
|
|
$
|
7,488,818
|
|
Options exercisable at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
894,800
|
|
|
$
|
9.31
|
|
|
|
6.09
|
|
|
$
|
5,322,412
|
|
The aggregate intrinsic value in the table above represents the
total pretax intrinsic value, based on our closing stock price
of $14.54 as of December 31, 2007, which would have been
received by the option holders had all option holders exercised
their options as of that date. During fiscal years 2007, 2006
and 2005 the aggregate intrinsic value of options exercised
under our Equity Incentive Plan was $5.1 million,
$4.8 million and $2.1 million, respectively,
determined as of the date of option exercise.
The options outstanding and currently exercisable at
December 31, 2007 were in the following exercise price
ranges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
Contractual Term
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Vested and
|
|
|
Average
|
|
Range of Exercise Prices
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
(In Years)
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
$ 2.63 - $ 4.06
|
|
|
316,114
|
|
|
|
4.51
|
|
|
$
|
2.99
|
|
|
|
288,530
|
|
|
$
|
2.88
|
|
$ 4.12 - $ 7.72
|
|
|
358,175
|
|
|
|
6.53
|
|
|
$
|
7.04
|
|
|
|
111,025
|
|
|
$
|
6.28
|
|
$ 7.77 - $10.69
|
|
|
275,765
|
|
|
|
6.88
|
|
|
$
|
9.20
|
|
|
|
182,665
|
|
|
$
|
9.86
|
|
$10.95 - $15.40
|
|
|
280,950
|
|
|
|
8.45
|
|
|
$
|
14.24
|
|
|
|
116,250
|
|
|
$
|
12.93
|
|
$15.50 - $15.81
|
|
|
157,125
|
|
|
|
7.95
|
|
|
$
|
15.80
|
|
|
|
39,000
|
|
|
$
|
15.79
|
|
$16.13 - $16.13
|
|
|
720,475
|
|
|
|
9.01
|
|
|
$
|
16.13
|
|
|
|
85,080
|
|
|
$
|
16.13
|
|
$16.87 - $22.01
|
|
|
283,000
|
|
|
|
8.60
|
|
|
$
|
19.49
|
|
|
|
44,000
|
|
|
$
|
19.03
|
|
$22.40 - $29.45
|
|
|
196,250
|
|
|
|
7.94
|
|
|
$
|
25.41
|
|
|
|
28,250
|
|
|
$
|
23.91
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ 2.63 - $29.45
|
|
|
2,587,854
|
|
|
|
7.64
|
|
|
$
|
13.37
|
|
|
|
894,800
|
|
|
$
|
9.31
|
|
As of December 31, 2007, the unrecognized deferred
stock-based compensation balance related to stock options was
$10.3 million and will be recognized over an estimated
weighted average amortization period of 1.63 years. The
amortization period is based on the expected term of the option,
which is defined as the period from grant date to exercise date.
53
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
2003
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Term (Years)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Purchase rights outstanding at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
354,816
|
|
|
$
|
11.70
|
|
|
|
1.04
|
|
|
$
|
1,008,826
|
|
Vested and expected to vest at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
313,050
|
|
|
$
|
11.42
|
|
|
|
0.97
|
|
|
$
|
976,332
|
|
The aggregate intrinsic value in the table above represents the
total pretax intrinsic value, based on our closing stock price
of $14.54 as of December 31, 2007, which would have been
received by the purchase right holders had all purchase right
holders exercised their purchase rights as of that date. During
fiscal years 2007, 2006 and 2005 the aggregate intrinsic value
of purchase rights exercised under our ESPP was $317,000,
$2.1 million and $806,000, respectively, determined as of
the date of purchase.
During the twelve months ended December 31, 2007,
90,018 shares were purchased at an average per share price
of $15.27. At December 31, 2007, there were
297,919 shares available to be issued under the ESPP.
As of December 31, 2007, the unrecorded deferred
stock-based compensation balance related to purchase rights was
$1.5 million and will be recognized over an estimated
weighted average recognition period of 1.04 years. The
recognition period is based on the expected term of the purchase
right, which is defined as the period from grant date to
expiration of the offering period.
Prior to
the Adoption of SFAS No. 123(R)
Prior to the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R), we provided
the disclosures required under SFAS No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, as amended
by SFAS No. 148, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation Transition and Disclosures.
Consistent with the disclosure provisions of SFAS 148, our
net income (loss) and basic and diluted earnings per share would
have been adjusted to the pro forma amounts indicated below (in
thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net income as reported
|
|
$
|
16,151
|
|
Deduct: Total stock-based employee compensation expense
determined under fair value based method for all awards, net of
related tax effects
|
|
|
(2,907
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income
|
|
$
|
13,244
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
Basic as reported
|
|
$
|
0.79
|
|
Basic pro forma
|
|
$
|
0.65
|
|
Diluted as reported
|
|
$
|
0.76
|
|
Diluted pro forma
|
|
$
|
0.62
|
|
54
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The weighted-average fair value of stock options granted was
$6.58 for the year ended December 31, 2005. The
weighted-average fair value of purchase rights granted was $5.14
for the year ended December 31, 2005. The fair value of
each option grant and purchase right was estimated on the date
of grant using the Black-Scholes Merton option valuation model
with the following weighted average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Options
|
|
|
Purchase Rights
|
|
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
92.30
|
%
|
|
|
91.74
|
%
|
Risk free interest rate
|
|
|
4.30
|
%
|
|
|
3.89
|
%
|
Expected term of options and purchase rights (in years)
|
|
|
5.99
|
|
|
|
1.27
|
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
None
|
|
|
|
None
|
|
On October 27, 2005, our Board of Directors approved
accelerating the vesting of approximately 306,000
out-of-the-money unvested common stock options
previously awarded to employees and officers under our stock
option plans. Vesting was accelerated for stock options that had
exercise prices greater than or equal to $9.06 per share, which
was the closing price of our common stock on October 27,
2005. In connection with the modification of the terms of these
options to accelerate their vesting, approximately
$1.5 million is reflected as a non-cash compensation
expense on a pro-forma basis in accordance with SFAS 123 in
the pro-forma table above for the year ended December 31,
2005. This action was taken to reduce the impact of future
compensation expense that we would otherwise be required to
recognize in future consolidated statements of operations
pursuant to SFAS 123R.
Delta
Nu, LLC
On January 31, 2007, we completed the acquisition of the
assets and certain liabilities of DeltaNu, LLC
(DeltaNu) for a total purchase price of
$6 million. The purchase price was comprised of
$2 million cash paid at the close of the acquisition and
$2 million due on each of January 31, 2008 and
January 31, 2009, which is in the form of a note. These
notes do not bear interest. Interest is imputed, and the related
Notes Payable are recorded at a discounted in the accompanying
Consolidated Balance Sheet. As a result of the discount on the
notes, the total allocated purchase price is $5.8 million.
DeltaNu is a Laramie, Wyoming company specializing in small
footprint and handheld Raman spectrometry instruments.
We accounted for the acquisition as a taxable purchase
transaction and, accordingly, the purchase price has been
allocated to tangible assets, liabilities assumed, and
identifiable intangible assets acquired based on their estimated
fair values on the acquisition date. The excess of the purchase
price over the aggregate fair values was recorded as goodwill.
The fair value assigned to identifiable intangible assets
acquired is determined using the income approach, which
discounts expected future cash flows to present value using
estimates and assumptions determined by management. Purchased
intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over
the respective useful lives. Our allocation of the purchase
price is summarized below (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Net liabilities assumed, net of cash of $4
|
|
$
|
(31
|
)
|
Backlog
|
|
|
120
|
|
Trademarks/names
|
|
|
120
|
|
Customer relationships
|
|
|
60
|
|
Non-compete agreements
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
369
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
5,434
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
5,803
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The $5.8 million allocated purchase price consists of
$2.0 million paid in cash, $3.7 million in notes
payable (present value at January 31, 2007) and
$87,000 in acquisition-related expenses. The estimated useful
economic lives of the identified intangible assets acquired are
two years for the customer relationships and non-compete
agreements and approximately four months for the backlog. The
trademark/names asset has an indefinite life.
Creative
Display Systems, LLC
On November 9, 2007, we completed the acquisition of the
assets and certain liabilities of Creative Display Systems, LLC
(CDS) for a total purchase price of $6 million
cash paid at the close of the acquisition. CDS is a Carlsbad,
California company specializing in high-performance
micro-display products for near-eye and portable applications in
defense and commercial markets.
We accounted for the acquisition as a taxable purchase
transaction and, accordingly, the purchase price has been
allocated to tangible assets, liabilities assumed, and
identifiable intangible assets acquired based on their estimated
fair values on the acquisition date. The excess of the purchase
price over the aggregate fair values was recorded as goodwill.
The fair value assigned to identifiable intangible assets
acquired is determined using the income approach, which
discounts expected future cash flows to present value using
estimates and assumptions determined by management. Purchased
intangible assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over
the respective useful lives. Our allocation of the purchase
price is summarized below (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Net assets acquired, net of cash of $130
|
|
$
|
1,896
|
|
Technology I-Port
|
|
|
375
|
|
Technology Optical Display
|
|
|
515
|
|
Backlog
|
|
|
110
|
|
Customer relationships
|
|
|
560
|
|
Non-compete agreements
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,496
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
2,471
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
5,967
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The $6.0 million allocated purchase price consists of
$6.0 million paid in cash and $97,000 in
acquisition-related expenses, less cash acquired of $130,000.
The estimated useful economic lives of the identified intangible
assets acquired are ten years for the technology, thirteen years
for the customer relationships, three years for the non-compete
agreements and approximately three months for the backlog.
In accordance with SFAS No. 141, we allocated the
excess of the cost of the acquired entities over the net amounts
of assets acquired and liabilities assumed to goodwill. At
December 31, 2007, we had recorded $7.9 million of
goodwill on our Consolidated Balance Sheet. In accordance with
SFAS No. 142, goodwill is not amortized. Instead, it
is tested for impairment on an annual basis or more frequently
upon the occurrence of circumstances that indicate that goodwill
may be impaired. We did not record any impairment of goodwill
during fiscal 2007.
56
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Total amortization expense for the year ended December 31,
2007 was $218,000. Future amortization expense for the existing
amortizable intangible assets for the years ending
December 31, is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
335,000
|
|
2009
|
|
|
152,000
|
|
2010
|
|
|
143,000
|
|
2011
|
|
|
132,000
|
|
2012
|
|
|
132,000
|
|
Beyond
|
|
|
768,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1,662,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The results of operations for the acquired businesses have been
included in our consolidated statements of operations for the
period subsequent to our acquisition of DeltaNu and CDS. The
results of operations for DeltaNu and CDS for periods prior to
this acquisition were not material to our consolidated
statements of operations and, accordingly, pro forma financial
information has not been presented.
Credit
Risk and Significant Customers
Financial instruments that potentially subject us to significant
concentrations of credit risk consist of cash equivalents,
short- and long-term investments, accounts receivable and
foreign exchange forward contracts. We generally invest our
excess cash in money market funds, Auction Rate Securities,
commercial paper and debt securities of the U.S. government
and its agencies, which each have contracted maturities of
25 months or less and an average maturity in aggregate of
one year or less. By policy, our investments in commercial
paper, Auction Rate Securities, certificates of deposit,
Eurodollar time deposits, or bankers acceptances are rated
AAA or better, and we limit the amount of credit exposure to any
one issuer.
Our accounts receivable tend to be concentrated in a limited
number of customers. At December 31, 2007, three customers
accounted for 14%, 12% and 11%, respectively, of our accounts
receivable and in aggregate accounted for 38% of net accounts
receivable. At December 31, 2006, three customers accounted
for 39%, 34% and 13%, respectively, of our accounts receivable
and in aggregate accounted for 86% of net accounts receivable.
At December 31, 2005, four customers accounted for 33%,
22%, 20% and 18%, respectively, of our accounts receivable and
in aggregate accounted for 93% of net accounts receivable.
Our largest customers tend to change from period to period.
Historically, a significant portion of our revenues in any
particular period have been attributable to sales to a limited
number of customers. In 2007, four customers accounted for 31%,
23%, 23% and 13%, respectively, of our consolidated net revenues
and in aggregate accounted for 90% of net revenues. In 2006,
three customers accounted for 52%, 22% and 19%, respectively, of
our consolidated net revenues and in aggregate accounted for 93%
of net revenues. In 2005, four customers accounted for 41%, 24%,
14% and 11%, respectively, of our consolidated net revenues and
in aggregate accounted for 90% of net revenues. Intevac performs
credit evaluations of its customers financial condition
and generally requires deposits on system orders but does not
generally require collateral or other security to support
customer receivables.
Products
Disk manufacturing products contributed a significant portion of
our revenues in 2007, 2006, and 2005. We expect that our ability
to maintain or expand our current levels of revenues in the
future will depend upon continuing market demand for our
products; our success in enhancing our existing systems and
developing and manufacturing competitive disk manufacturing
equipment, such as our 200 Lean; our success in developing both
military and
57
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
commercial products based on our low light technology; and our
success in utilizing our expertise in complex manufacturing
equipment to develop new equipment products for semiconductor
manufacturing.
601
California Avenue LLC
In 1995, we entered into a Limited Liability Company Operating
Agreement (the Operating Agreement), with 601
California Avenue LLC (the LLC), a California
limited liability company formed and owned by Intevac and
certain stockholders of Intevac. Under the Operating Agreement
we transferred our leasehold interest in the site of our
discontinued night vision business in exchange for a Preferred
Share in the LLC with a face value of $3.9 million. During
1996, the LLC formed a joint venture with Stanford University
(the Stanford JV) to develop and lease the property.
In December 2007, the Stanford JV sold the property, and LLC
redeemed Intevacs $3.9 million Preferred Share.
We accounted for the investment under the cost method and
originally recorded our investment in the LLC at $2,431,000,
which represented our historical carrying value of the leasehold
interest in the site. The Company received dividends of
$292,500, $390,000 and $390,000 in 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively, from LLC. These dividends and the $1,469,000 gain
realized upon redemption of the Preferred Share in December 2007
were included in other income and expense.
|
|
7.
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
Leases
We lease certain facilities under non-cancelable operating
leases that expire at various times up to February 2013. Certain
of our leases contain provisions for rental adjustments,
including a provision based on increases in the Bay Area
Consumer Price Index. Included in other long term assets on the
Consolidated Balance Sheets is $1.8 million of prepaid rent
related to the effective rent on our long-term lease for our
Santa Clara facility. The facility leases require Intevac
to pay for all normal maintenance costs.
Future minimum rental payments under these leases at
December 31, 2007 are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
2,534
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2,520
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2,386
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2,310
|
|
2012
|
|
|
744
|
|
Beyond
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
10,530
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross rental expense was approximately $3,300,000, $2,726,000,
and $2,454,000 for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006,
and 2005, respectively.
Contingencies
From time to time, we may have certain contingent liabilities
that arise in the ordinary course of our business activities. We
account for contingent liabilities when it is probable that
future expenditures will be made and such expenditures can be
reasonably estimated.
On July 7, 2006, we filed a patent infringement lawsuit
against Unaxis USA, Inc. (a wholly owned subsidiary of Oerlikon)
and its affiliates, Unaxis Balzers AG and Unaxis Balzers, Ltd.,
in the United States District Court for the Central District of
California. Our lawsuit against Unaxis asserts infringement by
Unaxis of United States Patent
58
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
6,919,001, which relates to our 200 Lean system. Our complaint
seeks monetary damages and an injunction that would bar Unaxis
from making, using, offering to sell or selling in the United
States, or importing into the United States, Unaxis
allegedly infringing product. We believe we have meritorious
claims, and we intend to pursue them vigorously.
On September 12, 2006, Unaxis filed a response to our
lawsuit in which it asserted non-infringement, invalidity of our
patent, inequitable conduct by Intevac, patent misuse by
Intevac, and lack of jurisdiction by the Court as defenses.
Additionally, Unaxis requested a declaratory judgment of patent
non-infringement, invalidity and unenforceability; asserted that
Intevac violated the California Business and Professional Code;
requested that we be enjoined from engaging in any unfair
competition; and requested that we be required to pay
Unaxis attorney fees. We believe such claims lack merit,
and we intend to defend ourselves vigorously.
We replied to Unaxis response on October 3, 2006,
denying the assertions of non-infringement, invalidity and
unenforceability of the Intevac patent, and denying any unfair
competition. With the approval of the Court, we amended our
complaint on February 6, 2007 to assert an additional
ground for our infringement claim and to add a request for a
declaratory judgment of infringement. Unaxis filed a response on
February 21, 2007, in which it repeated the assertions of
its September 12, 2006 response.
On May 21, 2007, the Court granted Unaxis request to
stay the litigation pending reexamination of our United States
Patent 6,919,001, after the U.S. Patent Office granted
Unaxis February 27, 2007 reexamination request and
issued an initial office action rejecting the claims of the
patent. The Court also ordered the parties to file a joint
report every 120 days to keep it appraised of the
reexamination status. Intevac had no input to the initial office
action determination by the U.S. Patent Office.
On June 20, 2007, we filed a reply to the initial office
action reexamination. Our reply addresses the office
actions rejections of the patents original claims
and proposes amended claims that we believe are supported by the
original patents specification. Unaxis responded to our
reply, and the U.S. Patent Office is now considering both
parties submissions. During the reexamination process, the
patent remains valid.
Employee
Savings and Retirement Plan
In 1991, we established a defined contribution retirement plan
with 401(k) plan features. The plan covers all United States
employees eighteen years and older. Employees may make
contributions by a percentage reduction in their salaries, not
to exceed the statutorily prescribed annual limit. We made cash
contributions of $481,000, $437,000 and $327,000 for the years
ended December 31, 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
Employees may choose among twelve investment options for their
contributions and their share of Intevacs contributions,
and they are able to move funds between investment options at
any time. Intevacs common stock is not one of the
investment options. Administrative expenses relating to the plan
are insignificant.
Employee
Bonus Plans
We have various employee bonus plans. A profit-sharing plan
provides for the distribution of a percentage of pre-tax profits
to substantially all of our employees not eligible for other
performance-based incentive plans, up to a maximum percentage of
compensation. Other plans award annual or quarterly bonuses to
our executives and key contributors based on the achievement of
profitability and other specific performance criteria. Charges
to expense under these plans were $5.2 million,
$8.3 million and $3.2 million for the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
59
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Segment
Description
We have two reportable operating segments: Equipment and Imaging
Instrumentation. Our Equipment business is a leader in the
design, manufacture and marketing of high-productivity
lean manufacturing systems and has been producing
Lean Thinking platforms since 1994. We are the
leading supplier of magnetic media sputtering equipment to the
hard disk drive industry and offer leading-edge,
high-productivity etch systems to the semiconductor industry.
Our Imaging Instrumentation business is a leader in the
development of compact, cost-effective, high-sensitivity
digital-optical products for the capture and display of
low-light images and the optical analysis of materials. We
provide sensors, cameras and systems for commercial applications
in the inspection, medical, scientific and security industries
and for government applications such as night vision and
long-range target identification.
Included in corporate activities are general corporate expenses,
less an allocation of corporate expenses to operating units
equal to 3% of net revenues. Assets of corporate activities
include unallocated cash and short-term investments, deferred
tax assets and other assets.
Segment
Profit or Loss and Segment Assets
We evaluate performance and allocate resources based on a number
of factors, including profit or loss from operations and future
revenue potential. The accounting policies of the reportable
segments are the same as those described in the summary of
significant accounting policies.
Business
Segment Net Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Equipment
|
|
$
|
196,686
|
|
|
$
|
248,482
|
|
|
$
|
129,280
|
|
Imaging Instrumentation
|
|
|
19,148
|
|
|
|
11,393
|
|
|
|
7,949
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
215,834
|
|
|
$
|
259,875
|
|
|
$
|
137,229
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business
Segment Profit (Loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Equipment(1)(2)
|
|
$
|
32,903
|
|
|
$
|
52,223
|
|
|
$
|
20,413
|
|
Imaging Instrumentation(3)(4)
|
|
|
(2,919
|
)
|
|
|
(4,826
|
)
|
|
|
(5,798
|
)
|
Corporate activities(5)
|
|
|
(2,548
|
)
|
|
|
602
|
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income
|
|
|
27,436
|
|
|
|
47,999
|
|
|
|
14,717
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
6,544
|
|
|
|
3,501
|
|
|
|
1,303
|
|
Other income and expense, net
|
|
|
1,598
|
|
|
|
277
|
|
|
|
552
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes
|
|
$
|
35,578
|
|
|
$
|
51,777
|
|
|
$
|
16,572
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes inventory provisions of $839,000, $1.4 million and
$782,000 in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. |
|
(2) |
|
Includes stock-based compensation expense of $3.0 million
and $2.1 million in 2007 and 2006, respectively. |
|
(3) |
|
Includes inventory provisions of $23,000, $124,000 and $91,000
in 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. |
|
(4) |
|
Includes stock-based compensation expense of $1.4 million
and $525,000 in 2007 and 2006, respectively. |
|
(5) |
|
Includes stock-based compensation expense of $1.7 million
and $777,000 in 2007 and 2006, respectively. |
60
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Business
Segment Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Equipment
|
|
$
|
36,637
|
|
|
$
|
84,366
|
|
Imaging Instrumentation
|
|
|
26,715
|
|
|
|
7,379
|
|
Corporate activities
|
|
|
152,061
|
|
|
|
114,258
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
215,413
|
|
|
$
|
206,003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business
Segment Property, Plant & Equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Equipment
|
|
$
|
2,816
|
|
|
$
|
5,702
|
|
Imaging Instrumentation
|
|
|
858
|
|
|
|
979
|
|
Corporate activities
|
|
|
2,061
|
|
|
|
1,742
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total additions
|
|
$
|
5,735
|
|
|
$
|
8,423
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Equipment
|
|
$
|
2,228
|
|
|
$
|
1,120
|
|
|
$
|
822
|
|
Imaging Instrumentation
|
|
|
1,274
|
|
|
|
1,217
|
|
|
|
1,054
|
|
Corporate activities
|
|
|
701
|
|
|
|
509
|
|
|
|
274
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total depreciation
|
|
$
|
4,203
|
|
|
$
|
2,846
|
|
|
$
|
2,150
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Geographic Breakdown
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
14,368
|
|
|
$
|
12,690
|
|
Asia
|
|
|
1,034
|
|
|
|
856
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net property, plant & equipment
|
|
$
|
15,402
|
|
|
$
|
13,546
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Geographic
Area Net Trade Revenues
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
38,801
|
|
|
$
|
26,473
|
|
|
$
|
39,754
|
|
Asia
|
|
|
175,907
|
|
|
|
233,158
|
|
|
|
96,694
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
1,083
|
|
|
|
244
|
|
|
|
781
|
|
Rest of world
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
$
|
215,834
|
|
|
$
|
259,875
|
|
|
$
|
137,229
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues are attributable to the geographic area in which our
customers are located. Net trade revenues in Asia includes
shipments to Singapore, China, Japan and Malaysia.
61
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The provision for income taxes on income from continuing
operations consists of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Federal:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
$
|
9,534
|
|
|
$
|
9,479
|
|
|
$
|
392
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
(1,507
|
)
|
|
|
(3,750
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,027
|
|
|
|
5,729
|
|
|
|
392
|
|
State:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
(147
|
)
|
|
|
(831
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(144
|
)
|
|
|
(829
|
)
|
|
|
9
|
|
Foreign:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
350
|
|
|
|
179
|
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
8,233
|
|
|
$
|
5,079
|
|
|
$
|
421
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes consisted of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
$
|
32,066
|
|
|
$
|
51,004
|
|
|
$
|
16,319
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
3,512
|
|
|
|
773
|
|
|
|
253
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
35,578
|
|
|
$
|
51,777
|
|
|
$
|
16,572
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The tax benefits associated with exercises of nonqualified stock
options and disqualifying dispositions of stock acquired through
incentive stock options and the employee stock purchase plan
reduced taxes currently payable for 2007 and 2006 by
$3.0 million and $2.7 million, respectively. Such
benefits were credited to additional paid-in capital.
62
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary
differences between the carrying amounts of assets and
liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts for
income tax purposes. Significant components of our deferred tax
assets computed in accordance with SFAS No. 109 are as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Vacation, rent, warranty and other accruals
|
|
$
|
1,142
|
|
|
$
|
2,090
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
186
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
Inventory valuation
|
|
|
3,217
|
|
|
|
3,135
|
|
Deferred income
|
|
|
99
|
|
|
|
248
|
|
Equity-based compensation
|
|
|
3,003
|
|
|
|
1,084
|
|
Research and other tax credit carry-forwards
|
|
|
2,472
|
|
|
|
590
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(47
|
)
|
|
|
234
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,072
|
|
|
|
7,425
|
|
Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets
|
|
|
(2,723
|
)
|
|
|
(2,844
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
7,349
|
|
|
$
|
4,581
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As reported on the balance sheet:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
4,133
|
|
|
$
|
4,488
|
|
Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets
|
|
|
(524
|
)
|
|
|
(1,219
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net current deferred tax assets
|
|
|
3,609
|
|
|
|
3,269
|
|
Other long term assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
5,939
|
|
|
|
2,937
|
|
Valuation allowance for deferred tax assets
|
|
|
(2,199
|
)
|
|
|
(1,625
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net non-current deferred tax assets
|
|
|
3,740
|
|
|
|
1,312
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
7,349
|
|
|
$
|
4,581
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The valuation allowance of $2.7 million is attributable to
temporary differences and deferred research and development
credits that are not realizable in 2008. State research credit
carry-forwards of $1.5 million, net of a $1.0 million
valuation allowance, do not expire.
63
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
A reconciliation of the income tax provision on income from
continuing operations at the federal statutory rate of 35% to
the income tax provision at the effective tax rate is as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Income taxes at the federal statutory rate
|
|
$
|
12,452
|
|
|
$
|
18,122
|
|
|
$
|
5,795
|
|
State income taxes, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
(539
|
)
|
|
|
6
|
|
Effect of foreign operations taxes at various rates
|
|
|
(879
|
)
|
|
|
(93
|
)
|
|
|
(39
|
)
|
Research tax credits
|
|
|
(1,800
|
)
|
|
|
(2,128
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of tax rate changes, permanent differences and
adjustments of prior deferrals
|
|
|
(1,699
|
)
|
|
|
(38
|
)
|
|
|
(430
|
)
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,943
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in valuation allowance
|
|
|
(121
|
)
|
|
|
(12,188
|
)
|
|
|
(4,911
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
253
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
8,233
|
|
|
$
|
5,079
|
|
|
$
|
421
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in the above rate reconciliation is $2.7 million
of favorable federal and state adjustments related to prior
estimates for Domestic Activities Production Deduction,
Extra-Territorial Income, research and development credits and
deferred tax assets.
We have not provided for U.S. federal income and foreign
withholding taxes on approximately $5.3 million of
undistributed earnings from
non-U.S. operations
as of December 31, 2007 because we intend to reinvest such
earnings indefinitely outside of the United States. If we were
to distribute these earnings, foreign tax credits may become
available under current law to reduce the resulting
U.S. income tax liability. Determination of the amount of
unrecognized deferred tax liability related to these earnings is
not practicable. We will remit the non-indefinitely reinvested
earnings of our
non-U.S. subsidiaries
where excess cash has accumulated and we determine that it is
advantageous for business operations, tax or cash reasons.
We adopted the provisions of FASB Interpretation Number 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,
(FIN 48) on January 1, 2007. As required
by FIN 48, which clarifies SFAS No. 109,
Accounting for Income Taxes, we recognize the
financial statement benefit of a tax position only after
determining that the relevant tax authority would more likely
than not sustain the position following an audit. For tax
positions meeting the more-likely-than-not threshold, the amount
recognized in the financial statements is the largest benefit
that has a greater than 50 percent likelihood of being
realized upon ultimate settlement with the relevant tax
authority. During 2007, we applied FIN 48 to all tax
positions for which the statute of limitations remained open and
determined that there would be no material impact on the
financial statements for any years still subject to a potential
tax audit. We did recognized an immaterial increase in the
liability for unrecognized tax benefits. This liability arose
due to a change in the state and local reporting methodology,
which might affect certain tax attributes.
We did not accrue any interest or penalties related to these
unrecognized tax benefits because we have other tax attributes
which would offset any potential taxes due.
We are subject to income taxes in the U.S. federal
jurisdiction, and various states and foreign jurisdictions. Tax
regulations within each jurisdiction are subject to the
interpretation of the related tax laws and regulations and
require significant judgment to apply. With few exceptions, we
are not subject to U.S. federal, state and local, or
international jurisdictions income tax examinations by tax
authorities for the years before 2004. Presently, there are no
active income tax examinations in the jurisdictions where we
operates.
64
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
11.
|
Other
Accrued Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Accrued product warranties
|
|
$
|
2,814
|
|
|
$
|
4,208
|
|
Accrued taxes
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
1,533
|
|
Deferred income
|
|
|
1,541
|
|
|
|
573
|
|
Other
|
|
|
914
|
|
|
|
298
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other accrued liabilities
|
|
$
|
5,454
|
|
|
$
|
6,612
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.
|
Quarterly
Consolidated Results of Operations (Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
June 30,
|
|
|
Sept. 29,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
76,374
|
|
|
$
|
72,105
|
|
|
$
|
50,604
|
|
|
$
|
16,751
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
32,782
|
|
|
|
30,827
|
|
|
|
24,615
|
|
|
|
7,819
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
9,845
|
|
|
|
11,552
|
|
|
|
8,364
|
|
|
|
(2,416
|
)
|
Basic income (loss) per share
|
|
$
|
0.46
|
|
|
$
|
0.54
|
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
|
$
|
(0.11
|
)
|
Diluted income (loss) per share
|
|
|
0.44
|
|
|
|
0.52
|
|
|
|
0.38
|
|
|
|
(0.11
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended
|
|
|
|
April 1,
|
|
|
July 1,
|
|
|
Sept. 30,
|
|
|
Dec. 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
49,620
|
|
|
$
|
59,542
|
|
|
$
|
54,829
|
|
|
$
|
95,884
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
17,306
|
|
|
|
21,262
|
|
|
|
23,280
|
|
|
|
39,111
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
7,011
|
|
|
|
9,333
|
|
|
|
9,013
|
|
|
|
21,341
|
|
Basic income per share
|
|
$
|
0.34
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
0.43
|
|
|
$
|
1.01
|
|
Diluted income per share
|
|
|
0.32
|
|
|
|
0.42
|
|
|
|
0.41
|
|
|
|
0.97
|
|
Auction
Rate Securities
At December 31, 2007, we held $81.5 million of Auction
Rate Securities, valued at fair market value, which was equal to
cost. Beginning in mid-February, certain of these Auction Rate
Securities failed auction due to sell orders exceeding buy
orders. The funds associated with failed auctions will not be
accessible until a successful auction occurs or a buyer is found
outside of the auction process. All of our Auction Rate
Securities are student loan structured issues, where the loans
have been originated under the Department of Educations
Federal Family Education Loan Program and the principal and
interest is 97% reinsured by the U.S. Department of
Education. At this time, there has been no change in the AAA
rating of these securities.
The auction failures for the specific type of Auction Rate
Securities in which we invest are so recent that neither
valuation models nor secondary markets yet exist. We will
continue to monitor the market for our Auction Rate Securities
and will analyze the valuation of these investments each
reporting period. If the valuation of these investments decline,
we may be required to record unrealized losses in other
comprehensive income or impairment charges in 2008.
65
INTEVAC,
INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
We intend and have the ability to hold these Auction Rate
Securities until the market recovers. We do not anticipate
having to sell these securities in order to operate our
business. We believe that the cash generated by our operating
activities, the scheduled maturities of other investments and
the establishment of a standby line of credit will be sufficient
to meet our cash requirements until the market for the Auction
Rate Securities becomes liquid again.
Standby
Line of Credit
On March 5, 2008, we entered into an agreement with
Citigroup Global Markets Inc (Citi). for a secured
revolving loan facility. This loan facility is secured by our
Auction Rate Securities held at Citi. Approximately
$20 million of credit is currently available pursuant to
the loan facility. The interest rate on the loan facility is
Prime minus 1.5%, which is equal to, or less than, the interest
we are earning on the Auction Rate Securities whose auctions
have failed.
66
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
In and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None.
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
Managements
Report on Assessment of Internal Controls Over Financial
Reporting
Conclusions
Regarding Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Our chief executive officer and our chief financial officer have
concluded, based on the evaluation of the effectiveness of our
disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) by our
management, with the participation of our chief executive
officer and our chief financial officer, that our disclosure
controls and procedures were effective as of December 31,
2007.
Managements
Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined
in
Rules 13a-15(f)
and
15d-15(f)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended). Under
the supervision and with the participation of our management,
including our chief executive officer and chief financial
officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our
internal control over financial reporting based on the framework
in Internal Control Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission, or COSO. Based on our evaluation under the
framework in Internal Control Integrated
Framework , our management has concluded that our internal
control over financial reporting was effective as of
December 31, 2007.
Changes
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in our internal control over financial
reporting during our fourth fiscal quarter that have materially
affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our
internal control over financial reporting.
Limitations
on the Effectiveness of Controls
Our management, including our chief executive officer and chief
financial officer, does not expect that our disclosure controls
and procedures or our internal controls will prevent all errors
and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived
and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute,
assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.
Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact
that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of
controls must be considered relative to their costs. Our
disclosure controls and procedures and our internal controls
have been designed to provide reasonable assurance of achieving
their objectives. Because of the inherent limitations in all
control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute
assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if
any, within Intevac have been detected. An evaluation was
performed under the supervision and with the participation of
our management, including our chief executive officer and chief
financial officer, of the effectiveness of the design and
operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of
December 31, 2007. Based on that evaluation, our
management, including our chief executive officer and chief
financial officer, concluded that our disclosure controls and
procedures were effective at the reasonable assurance level.
67
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Board of Directors and Shareholders
Intevac, Inc.
We have audited Intevac, Inc. (a Delaware corporation) and
subsidiaries (collectively, the Company)
internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (COSO). The Companys management is responsible
for maintaining effective internal control over financial
reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting, included in the
accompanying Managements Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion
on the Companys internal control over financial reporting
based on our audit.
We conducted our audit 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 effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, Intevac, Inc. maintained, in all material
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by COSO.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheets of Intevac Inc. as of
December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated
statements of operations and comprehensive income,
stockholders equity and cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2007 and our report
dated March 14, 2008 expressed unqualified opinion on those
financial statements.
/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
San Jose, California
March 14, 2008
68
|
|
Item 9B.
|
Other
Information
|
On February 14, 2008, our Board of Directors approved an
updated form of indemnification agreement applicable to our
directors and certain of our officers. The form was intended to
update the current form for our reincorporation into Delaware
and general developments in corporate law since the adoption of
our original form of indemnification agreement and was done as
part of our ordinary course of corporate governance matters.
While we have not yet executed this new form of agreement with
our directors and officers, we intend to enter into these
agreements in the first quarter of 2008, and a copy of the form
of agreement is attached as Exhibit 10.9 to this Report on
Form 10-K.
PART III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
The information required by this item relating to the
Companys directors and nominees, disclosure relating to
compliance with Section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and information regarding our code of ethics, audit
committee and stockholder recommendations for director nominees
is included under the captions Election of
Directors, Nominees, Business Experience
of Nominees for Election as Directors, Board
Meetings and Committees, Corporate Governance
Matters, Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership
Reporting Compliance and Code of Business Conduct
and Ethics in the Companys Proxy Statement for the
2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated herein
by reference. The information required by this item relating to
the Companys executive officers and key employees is
included under the caption Executive Officers under
Item 4 in Part I of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
The information required by this item is included under the
caption Executive Compensation and Related
Information in the Companys Proxy Statement for the
2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated herein
by reference.
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
Securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation
plans. The following table summarizes the number
of outstanding options granted to employees and directors, as
well as the number of securities remaining available for future
issuance, under our equity compensation plans at
December 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a)
|
|
|
|
|
|
(c)
|
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
(b)
|
|
|
Number of Securities
|
|
|
|
to be Issued Upon
|
|
|
Weighted-Average
|
|
|
Remaining Available
|
|
|
|
Exercise of
|
|
|
Exercise Price of
|
|
|
for Future Issuance
|
|
|
|
Outstanding Options,
|
|
|
Outstanding Options,
|
|
|
Under Equity
|
|
Plan Category
|
|
Warrants and Rights
|
|
|
Warrants and Rights
|
|
|
Compensation Plans(1)
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved by security holders(2)
|
|
|
2,587,854
|
|
|
$
|
13.37
|
|
|
|
937,772
|
|
Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2,587,854
|
|
|
$
|
13.37
|
|
|
|
937,772
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes securities reflected in column (a). |
|
(2) |
|
Included in the column (c) amount are 297,919 shares
available for future issuance under Intevacs 2003 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan. |
The other information required by this item is included under
the caption Ownership of Securities in the
Companys Proxy Statement for the 2008 Annual Meeting of
Stockholders and is incorporated herein by reference.
69
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
The information required by this item is included under the
captions Certain Transactions and Corporate
Governance Matters in the Companys Proxy Statement
for the 2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated
herein by reference.
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
|
The information required by this item is included under the
caption Fees Paid To Accountants For Services Rendered
During 2007 in the Companys Proxy Statement for the
2008 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated herein
by reference.
PART IV
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
(a) List of Documents filed as part of this Annual Report
on
Form 10-K.
1. The following consolidated financial statements of
Intevac, Inc. are filed in Part II, Item 8 of this
Annual Report on
Form 10-K:
Report of Grant Thornton LLP, Independent Auditors
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2007 and 2006
Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income
(Loss) for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
Consolidated Statement of Stockholders Equity for the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for the years ended
December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
2. Financial Statement Schedules.
The following financial statement schedule of Intevac, Inc. is
filed in Part IV, Item 15(a) of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K:
Schedule II Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
All other schedules have been omitted since the required
information is not present in amounts sufficient to require
submission of the schedule or because the information required
is included in the consolidated financial statements or notes
thereto.
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
3
|
.1(1)
|
|
Certificate of Incorporation of the Registrant
|
|
3
|
.2(1)
|
|
Bylaws of the Registrant
|
|
10
|
.1+(2)
|
|
The Registrants 1995 Stock Option/Stock Issuance Plan, as
amended
|
|
10
|
.2+(2)
|
|
The Registrants Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as amended
|
|
10
|
.3+(3)
|
|
The Registrants 2004 Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
10
|
.4(6)
|
|
Lease, dated February 5, 2001 regarding the space located
at 3510, 3544, 3560, 3570 and 3580 Bassett Street,
Santa Clara, California, including the First through Sixth
Amendments
|
|
10
|
.5(2)
|
|
601 California Avenue LLC Limited Liability Operating Agreement,
dated July 28, 1995
|
|
10
|
.6+(2)
|
|
The Registrants 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan
|
|
10
|
.7+(5)
|
|
The Registrants Executive Incentive Plan
|
70
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.8(7)
|
|
Loan Facility with Citigroup Global Markets, Inc.
|
|
10
|
.9
|
|
Director and Officer Indemnification Agreement
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
Subsidiaries of the Registrant
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
|
24
|
.1
|
|
Power of Attorney (see page 72)
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of President and Chief Executive Officer Pursuant
to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Vice-President, Finance and Administration,
Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary Pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certifications Pursuant to U.S.C. 1350, adopted Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Report on
Form 8-K
filed July 23, 2007 |
|
(2) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Registration Statement on
Form S-1
(No. 33-97806) |
|
(3) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Definitive
Proxy Statement filed March 31, 2004 |
|
(4) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Report on
Form 8-K
filed February 7, 2005 |
|
(5) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Report on
Form 8-K
filed February 7, 2006 |
|
(6) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys
Form 10-K
filed March 16, 2007 |
|
(7) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to the Companys Report on
Form 8-K
filed March 6, 2008 |
|
+ |
|
Management compensatory plan or arrangement required to be filed
as an exhibit pursuant to Item 15(c) of
Form 10-K |
71
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized, on March 14, 2008.
INTEVAC, INC.
Jeffrey Andreson
Vice President, Finance and Administration,
Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Secretary
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
POWER OF
ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose
signature appears below constitutes and appoints Kevin Fairbairn
and Jeffrey Andreson and each of them, as his true and lawful
attorneys-in-fact and agents, with full power of substitution
and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, in
any and all capacities, to sign any and all amendments
(including post-effective amendments) to this Report on
Form 10-K,
and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other
documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact and
agents, and each of them, full power and authority to do and
perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to
be done in connection therewith, as fully to all intents and
purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and
confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of
them, or their or his substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do
or cause to be done by virtue hereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons
on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the
dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ KEVIN
FAIRBAIRN
(Kevin
Fairbairn)
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|
March 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ NORMAN
H. POND
(Norman
H. Pond)
|
|
Chairman of the Board
|
|
March 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ JEFFREY
ANDRESON
(Jeffrey
Andreson)
|
|
Vice President, Finance and Administration, Chief Financial
Officer Treasurer and Secretary (Principal Financial and
Accounting Officer)
|
|
March 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ DAVID
DURY
(David
Dury)
|
|
Director
|
|
March 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ STANLEY
J. HILL
(Stanley
J. Hill)
|
|
Director
|
|
March 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ ROBERT
LEMOS
(Robert
Lemos)
|
|
Director
|
|
March 14, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ PING
YANG
(Ping
Yang)
|
|
Director
|
|
March 14, 2008
|
72
SCHEDULE II
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
INTEVAC,
INC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions (Reductions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Charged (Credited)
|
|
|
Charged (Credited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
|
to Costs and
|
|
|
to Other
|
|
|
Deductions
|
|
|
End
|
|
Description
|
|
of Period
|
|
|
Expenses
|
|
|
Accounts
|
|
|
Describe
|
|
|
of Period
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deducted from asset accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
$
|
217
|
|
|
$
|
211
|
|
|
$
|
(268
|
)
|
|
$
|
6
|
(1)
|
|
$
|
154
|
|
Inventory provisions
|
|
|
9,863
|
|
|
|
873
|
|
|
|
376
|
|
|
|
124
|
(2)
|
|
|
10,988
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deducted from asset accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
$
|
154
|
|
|
$
|
(14
|
)
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
143
|
|
Inventory provisions
|
|
|
10,988
|
|
|
|
1,527
|
|
|
|
(32
|
)
|
|
|
3,355
|
(2)
|
|
|
9,128
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deducted from asset accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
$
|
143
|
|
|
$
|
(84
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
(1)
|
|
$
|
57
|
|
Inventory provisions
|
|
|
9,128
|
|
|
|
862
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
2,395
|
(2)
|
|
|
7,750
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Write-offs of amounts deemed uncollectible. |
|
(2) |
|
Write-off of inventory having no future use or value to the
Company |
73