form10-k06302008.htm
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
(Mark
One)
x
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
|
For the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2008
OR
¨
|
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 000-17219
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Utah
|
|
87-0398877
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
incorporation
or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
Identification
No.)
|
5225
Wiley Post Way, Suite 500
Salt
Lake City, Utah 84116
(Address
of principal executive offices, including zip code)
(801)
975-7200
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
Securities
registered under 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 Capital Market
|
Securities
registered under Section 12(g) of the Act: None
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act.Yes ¨No x
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act.Yes ¨No x
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨
Indicate
by check mark 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 registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of the Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. x
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 definition of “larger accelerated filer,” “accelerated
filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act. (Check one):
Larger
Accelerated Filer ¨
|
Accelerated
Filer ¨
|
Non-Accelerated
Filer x
|
Smaller
Reporting Company ¨
|
Indicate
by check mark whether the issuer is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Securities Act).
Yes ¨ No
x
State the
aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by
non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was
last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the
last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal
quarter. The aggregate market value of the shares of voting common stock held by
non-affiliates was approximately $48,415,000 at December 31, 2007, based on the
$5.42 closing price for the Company’s common stock on the NASDAQ Capital Market
on such date. For purposes of this computation, all officers, directors, and 10%
beneficial owners of the registrant are deemed to be affiliates. Such
determination should not be deemed to be an admission that such officers,
directors, or 10% beneficial owners are, in fact, affiliates of the
registrant.
Indicate
the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common
stock, as of the latest practicable date. The number of shares of ClearOne
common stock outstanding as of September 9, 2008 was 10,230,968.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions
of the definitive proxy statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be
held November 14, 2008 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this
report.
INDEX
|
|
PAGE
|
SPECIAL
NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BUSINESS
|
1
|
|
RISK
FACTORS
|
12
|
|
UNRESOLVED
STAFF COMMENTS
|
17
|
|
PROPERTIES
|
18
|
|
LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
|
18
|
|
SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MARKET
FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS, AND ISSUER
PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
|
21
|
|
SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
|
23
|
|
MANAGEMENT’S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
|
26
|
|
QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
|
36
|
|
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL DATA
|
36
|
|
CHANGE
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURE
|
36
|
|
CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES
|
37
|
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DIRECTORS
AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
|
38
|
|
EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
|
38
|
|
SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED
STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
|
38
|
|
CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
|
38
|
|
PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
|
38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EXHIBITS
AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
SPECIAL
NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This
report contains forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements reflect our views
with respect to future events based upon information available to us at this
time. These forward-looking statements are subject to uncertainties and other
factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from these
statements. Forward-looking statements are typically identified by the use of
the words “believe,” “may,” “could,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “anticipate,”
“estimate,” “project,” “propose,” “plan,” “intend,” and similar words and
expressions. Examples of forward-looking statements are statements that describe
the proposed development, manufacturing, and sale of our products; statements
that describe our results of operations, pricing trends, the markets for our
products, our anticipated capital expenditures, our cost reduction and
operational restructuring initiatives, and regulatory developments; statements
with regard to the nature and extent of competition we may face in the future;
statements with respect to the sources of and need for future financing; and
statements with respect to future strategic plans, goals, and objectives.
Forward-looking statements are contained in this report under “Description of
Business” included in Item 1 of Part I, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Qualitative and Quantitative
Disclosures About Market Risk” included in Items 7 and 7A of Part II of this
Annual Report on Form 10-K. The forward-looking statements are based on present
circumstances and on our predictions respecting events that have not occurred,
that may not occur, or that may occur with different consequences and timing
than those now assumed or anticipated. Actual events or results may differ
materially from those discussed in the forward-looking statements as a result of
various factors, including the risk factors discussed in this report under the
caption “Item 1A: Risk Factors.” These cautionary statements are intended to be
applicable to all related forward-looking statements wherever they appear in
this report. The cautionary statements contained or referred to in this report
should also be considered in connection with any subsequent written or oral
forward-looking statements that may be issued by us or persons acting on our
behalf. Any forward-looking statements are made only as of the date of this
report and ClearOne assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements
to reflect subsequent events or circumstances.
References
in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to “ClearOne,” “we,” “us,” “CLRO” or “the
Company” refer to ClearOne Communications, Inc., a Utah corporation, and, unless
the context otherwise requires or is otherwise expressly stated, its
subsidiaries.
Overview
We are an
audio conferencing products company. We develop, manufacture, market, and
service a comprehensive line of high-quality audio conferencing products, which
range from personal conferencing products to tabletop conferencing phones to
professionally installed audio systems. We also manufacture and sell
conferencing furniture. We have a strong history of product innovation and plan
to continue to apply our expertise in audio engineering to develop and introduce
innovative new products and enhance our existing products. We believe the
performance and reliability of our high-quality audio products create a natural
communications environment, which saves organizations of all sizes time and
money by enabling more effective and efficient communication.
Our
products are used by organizations of all sizes to accomplish effective group
communication. Our end-users range from some of the world’s largest and most
prestigious companies and institutions to small and medium-sized businesses,
educational institutions, and government organizations as well as individual
consumers. We sell our products to these end-users primarily through a network
of independent distributors who in turn sell our products to dealers, systems
integrators, and value-added resellers. The Company also sells products on a
limited basis directly to dealers, systems integrators, value-added resellers,
and end-users.
ClearOne
was formed as a Utah corporation in 1983 organized under the laws of the State
of Utah. Our website address is www.clearone.com. Our
annual reports 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 our
website as soon as reasonably practicable after we file electronically such
material with, or furnish it to, the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
For a
discussion of certain risks applicable to our business, results of operations,
financial position, and liquidity see the risk factors described in “Items 1A,
Risk Factors” below.
Business
Strategy
ClearOne
currently participates in the following audio conferencing markets:
Market
|
Typical
Number of Participants
|
· Professional
Conferencing:
|
20-200
|
· Premium
Conferencing
|
8-30
|
· Tabletop
Conferencing
|
1-30
|
· Personal
Conferencing
|
1-15
|
Our goal
is to maintain our market leadership in the professional or installed segment of
the audio conferencing systems market, continue building on our leadership in
premium conferencing, the conferencing category we created, further penetrating
the tabletop conferencing space and continue evaluating the best method for
marketing and gaining traction in the personal conferencing market. We will
continue to improve our existing high-quality products and develop additional
new products as we build on what we believe to be the most advanced,
highest-quality and most complete audio conferencing product line on the market.
The principal components of our strategy to achieve this goal are set forth
below.
Provide
a superior conferencing experience
We have
been developing audio technologies since 1981 and believe we have established a
reputation for providing some of the highest quality group audio conferencing
solutions in the industry. Our proprietary audio signal processing technologies,
including Distributed Echo Cancellation®, have been the core of our professional
conferencing products and are the foundation for our new product development in
other conferencing categories. We plan to build upon our reputation of being a
market leader and continue to provide the highest quality products and
technologies to the customers and markets we serve.
Offer
greater value to our customers
To
provide our customers with audio conferencing products that offer high value, we
are focused on listening to our customers and delivering products to meet their
needs. By offering high quality products that are designed to solve conferencing
ease-of-use issues and are easy to install, configure, and maintain, we believe
we can provide greater value to our customers and enhance business
communications and decision making.
Leverage
and extend ClearOne technology leadership and innovation
We have
sharpened our focus on developing cutting edge audio conferencing products and
are committed to incorporating the latest technologies into our new and existing
product lines. Key to this effort is adopting emerging technologies such as
Voice over Internet Protocol ( or VoIP), high definition audio, wireless
connectivity, the convergence of voice and data networks, exploring new
application models for our premium and personal audio conferencing technologies,
and developing products based on internationally accepted standards and
protocols.
Expand
and strengthen sales channels
We
continue to expand and strengthen domestic and international sales channels
through the addition of key distributors and dealers that expand beyond our
traditional audio-video channels that carry our professional conferencing line.
We continue to direct significant sales efforts toward channel partners who are
focused on the tabletop conferencing space. We also continue to strengthen our
presence within the telephony reseller channel, which is best suited to sell our
RAV premium conferencing systems, MAX tabletop conference phones, and
CHAT personal conferencing products.
Broaden
our product offerings
We
believe that we offer the industry’s most complete audio conferencing product
line, including the following:
·
|
Professionally
installed audio conferencing systems that are used in executive
boardrooms, courtrooms, hospitals, and auditoriums that integrate with all
leading video and telepresence
systems
|
·
|
Premium
conferencing systems that integrate with video and web conferencing
systems
|
·
|
Tabletop
conferencing phones used in conference rooms and
offices
|
·
|
Personal
conferencing devices that enable hands-free audio communications in new
ways that have never before been
possible.
|
We plan
to continue to broaden and expand our product offerings to meet the evolving
needs of our customers, address changes in the markets we currently serve, and
effectively target new markets for our products.
Develop
strategic partnerships
To stay
on the leading edge of product and market developments, we plan to continue to
identify partners with expertise in areas strategic to our growth objectives. We
will work to develop partnerships with leaders in markets complimentary to
conferencing who can benefit from our audio products and technologies and
through whom we can access new market growth opportunities.
Strengthen
existing customer relationships through dedicated support
We have
developed outstanding technical and sales support teams that are dedicated to
providing customers with the best available service and support. We believe our
technical support is recognized as among the best in the industry and we will
continue to invest in the necessary resources to ensure that our customers have
access to the information and support they need to be successful in using our
products. We also dedicate significant resources to providing product training
to our channel partners worldwide.
Markets
and Products
Our
business is primarily focused on audio conferencing. We also previously operated
in the conferencing services segment until July 1, 2004 (fiscal 2005), when we
sold our conferencing services business to Clarinet, Inc., an affiliate of
American Teleconferencing Services, Ltd. doing business as Premiere Conferencing
and in the business services segment until March 4, 2005 (fiscal 2005), when we
sold the remaining operations in that area to 6351352 Canada Inc., a Canada
corporation.
Products
Overview
The
performance and reliability of our high-quality audio conferencing products
enable effective and efficient communication between geographically separated
businesses, employees, and customers. We offer a full range of audio
conferencing products, from high-end, professionally installed audio
conferencing systems used in executive boardrooms, courtrooms, hospitals,
classrooms, and auditoriums, to premium conferencing systems that interface with
video and web conferencing systems, to tabletop conference phones used in
conference rooms and offices, and to personal conferencing devices that can be
used with laptops and other portable devices. For each of the last three fiscal
years, our professionally installed audio conferencing and tabletop conference
phones have each contributed in excess of 15 percent of our consolidated
revenue. Our audio conferencing products feature our proprietary Distributed
Echo Cancellation® and noise cancellation technologies to enhance communication
during a conference call by eliminating echo and background noise. Most of our
products also feature proprietary audio processing technologies such as adaptive
modeling and first-microphone priority, which combine to deliver clear, crisp,
full-duplex audio. This enables natural communication between distant
conferencing participants similar to that of being in the same
room.
We
believe the principal drivers of demand for audio conferencing products are the
following:
·
|
Increasing
availability of easy-to-use audio conferencing
equipment
|
·
|
Improving
voice quality of audio conferencing systems compared to telephone handset
speakerphones
|
·
|
Trending
expansion of global, regional, and local corporate
enterprises
|
Other
factors that we expect to have a significant impact on the demand for audio
conferencing systems include:
·
|
Availability
of a wider range of affordable audio conferencing products for small
businesses and home offices
|
·
|
Growth
of distance learning and corporate training
programs
|
·
|
Trend
toward deploying greater numbers of
teleworkers
|
·
|
Decreases
in the amount of travel within most enterprises for routine
meetings
|
·
|
Transition
to the Internet Protocol, or IP, network from the traditional public
switched telephone network, or PSTN and the deployment of VoIP
applications
|
We expect
these growth factors to be offset by direct competition from high-end telephone
handset speakerphones, new and existing competitors in the audio conferencing
space, the technological volatility of IP-based products, and continued
pressures on enterprises to reduce spending.
Professional Audio
Conferencing Products
We have
been developing high-end, professionally installed audio conferencing products
since 1991 and believe we have established strong brand recognition for these
products worldwide. Our professional audio conferencing products include the
Converge™ Pro, Converge Amplifiers, XAP® and Converge 560/590 product
lines. The Converge SR 1212 product features similar technologies and is used
for sound reinforcement applications.
The
recently launched Converge Pro is expected to eventually replace the popular
XAP® series of audio conferencing systems. The Converge Pro series delivers a
significant feature set and performance improvements including unprecedented
proprietary acoustical echo cancellation, noise cancellation, full duplex
performance, enhanced management capabilities, and simplified configuration
utilities. The Converge SR 1212 is a digital matrix mixer that provides advanced
audio processing, microphone mixing, and routing for local sound
reinforcement.
The
Converge Pro, XAP and SR 1212 products are comprehensive audio processing
systems designed to excel in the most demanding acoustical environments and
routing configurations. These products are also used for integrating
high-quality audio with video and web conferencing systems.
Our
customers asked for a professional audio solution that was less expensive and
would fit the budgetary requirements for a mid-range conference
room. The Converge 560 and Converge 590 professional conferencing
systems fill this need. These products are positioned between our Professional
and Premium conferencing product lines both in terms of functionality and price,
and are an excellent fit for rooms requiring customized microphone and speaker
configurations (up to nine microphones can be connected) along with connectivity
to video and web conferencing systems. The Converge products also offer speech
lift to amplify a presenter’s voice in the local room.
In June
2008, we introduced the Converge Amplifiers. There are two models of the
Converge Amplifiers, the PA2250 and the PA4160. The PA 2250 is a
two-channel amplifier that provides 250 watts per channel while the PA 4160 is a
four-channel amplifier, providing 160 watts per channel. The PA 2250 and PA
4160, with their ample power and exceptional audio performance, satisfy the
demand for high definition, multi-channel audio for conferencing, rich media
presentations, and sound reinforcement applications.
ClearOne
also offers a Tabletop Controller for the Converge Pro and XAP platforms. This
affordable solution gives users the ability to easily start and navigate an
audio conference without the need for touch panel control systems, which can be
expensive, complex, or intimidating to users. The dial pad on the device
resembles a telephone keypad for instant familiarity and users can dial a
conference call as easily as dialing a telephone, with little or no training
required. The Tabletop Controller can cost thousands less than touch-screen
panel control systems and its simplified setup for the user-definable keys can
save customers programming time and expense as well. Along with its sleek,
functional design, this latest offering from ClearOne delivers what we believe
to be the most cost-effective, attractive and easy-to-use control solution for
Converge Pro and XAP systems on the market.
In March
2007, Frost and Sullivan, an analyst group that focuses on the conferencing
industry, awarded ClearOne their 2007 Product Line Strategy Award. This award is
presented each year to a company that has demonstrated the most insight into
customer needs and product demands within their industry, and has optimized its
product line by leveraging products with the various price, performance, and
feature points required by the market. Frost & Sullivan noted that ClearOne
is now firmly focused on developing and marketing a broad and comprehensive
portfolio of best-in-class audio conferencing products, from professional audio
systems, through to tabletop products and VoIP personal conferencing PC
peripherals. They also lauded ClearOne's strategy in expanding its portfolio,
leveraging its technology leadership in the professional audio space with its
market-leading XAP, Converge 560/590, and Converge Pro product
lines.
Premium Conferencing
Systems
Since
2004, we have provided our RAV audio conferencing system which is a complete,
out-of-the-box system that includes an audio mixer, Bose® loudspeakers,
microphones, and a control device that can be either wired or wireless. The RAV
product uniquely combines the sound quality of a professionally installed audio
system with the simplicity of a conference phone and can be easily connected to
rich-media devices, such as video or web conferencing systems, to deliver
enhanced audio performance. RAV is strategically positioned between our
professional and tabletop conferencing systems in price and functionality, and
fills an important audio conferencing application need for rooms requiring
integration of high-end audio quality with web or video
conferencing.
RAV
offers many powerful audio processing technologies from our professional audio
conferencing products without the need for professional installation and
programming. It features Distributed Echo Cancellation, noise cancellation,
microphone gating, and a drag-and-drop graphical user interface for easy system
setup, control, and management.
Tabletop Conferencing
Phones
Since
2003 we have provided our MAX line of tabletop conferencing phones. These phones
encapsulate the high-end echo cancellation, noise cancellation, and audio
processing technologies found in our professional audio conferencing
products.
The MAX
product line is comprised of four product families: the MAX® EX, MAXAttach™; MAX
Wireless, MAXAttach Wireless; and MAX IP™, MAXAttach IP™ tabletop conferencing
phones. MAX Wireless was the industry’s first wireless conferencing phone.
Designed for use in executive offices or small conference rooms with multiple
participants, MAX Wireless can be moved from room to room within 150 feet of its
base station. MAXAttach Wireless began shipping in May 2005 and was the
industry’s first and only dual-phone, completely wireless solution. This system
gives customers tremendous flexibility in covering larger conference room
areas.
The MAX
EX and MAXAttach wired phones feature a unique capability – instead of just
adding extension microphones for use in larger rooms, the conference phones can
be daisy chained together, up to a total of four phones. This provides even
distribution of microphones, loudspeakers, and controls for better sound quality
and improved user access in medium to large conference rooms. In addition, all
MAXAttach wired versions can be separated and used as single phones in smaller
conference rooms.
Our
latest additions to the MAX family are the MAX IP and MAXAttach IP, ClearOne’s
first VoIP tabletop conference phones, which are based on the industry-standard
SIP signaling protocol. These phones feature the same ability to daisy-chain up
to four phones together, providing outstanding room coverage that other VoIP
conference phones on the market cannot match.
Personal Conferencing
Products
In April
2006, we began shipping the CHAT™ 50 personal speaker phone. This revolutionary
crossover technology delivers ClearOne’s trademark crystal-clear full-duplex
audio performance, and can be used in a variety of applications with a wide
number of devices including the following:
PCs
& Macs
|
VoIP
telephony applications such as Skype & Vonage; enterprise softphones;
audio for web-based videoconferencing applications; gaming; audio
playback
|
Cell
phones
|
Connects
to the 2.5mm headset jack of many cell phones for hands-free, full-duplex
audio conferencing
|
Telephones
|
Connects
to the headset jack (certain phone models) for hands-free, full-duplex
audio conferencing
|
iPods
& MP3 players
|
For
full-bandwidth audio playback
|
Desktop
video conferencing systems
|
For
hands-free, full-duplex audio
conferencing
|
Through
public relations efforts by ClearOne, the CHAT 50 has garnered significant media
coverage and won PC Magazine’s Editors’ Choice Award.
The CHAT
150 began shipping in January 2007 and is the latest product to join ClearOne’s
personal conferencing category. It offers many of the same
connectivity options as the CHAT 50, but comes in a larger form factor and
features three microphones compared to the single microphone on the CHAT 50 for
use by a larger number of participants. The CHAT 150 connects to enterprise
telephone handsets, PCs, and video conferencing systems. ClearOne believes the
primary opportunity for the CHAT 150 is in connecting to the enterprise handset.
Customers will now have the ability to add a high-quality, full-duplex speaker
phone to their handsets, and still retain the full functionality that comes with
today’s handsets, including access to company directory, voicemail access, audio
bridge functions, and other features.
The CHAT
50 and CHAT 150 have also become popular with large enterprises and other
software and hardware vendors due to their audio quality and flexibility.
Several large enterprise customers bundle the CHAT products with a video
conferencing system that they provide to their remote employees. We also have
OEM agreements with several manufacturers who have chosen the CHAT products as
the preferred audio endpoint to their video conferencing equipment or web
collaboration software.
Other
Products
We
complement our audio conferencing products with microphones,
conferencing-specific furniture, and until August 2006, document and education
cameras. Our wide selection of wood, metal, and laminate conferencing furniture
features audiovisual carts; plasma screen carts and pedestals; and video
conferencing carts, tables, cabinets, and podiums.
Marketing
and Sales
We use a
two-tier channel distribution model, in which we primarily sell our products
directly to a worldwide network of independent audiovisual, information
technology, and telecommunications distributors, who then sell our products to
independent systems integrators, dealers, and value-added resellers, who in turn
work directly with the end-users of our products on product fulfillment and
installation. We also sell our products on a limited basis directly to certain
dealers, systems integrators, value-added resellers, and end-users.
In fiscal
2008, approximately $27.8 million, or 70 percent, of our total product sales
were generated in the United States and product sales of approximately $11.9
million, or 30 percent, were generated outside the United States. Revenue from
product customers outside of the United States accounted for approximately 29
percent of our total product sales from continuing operations for fiscal 2007
and 28 percent for fiscal 2006. We sell our products in more than 70 countries
worldwide. We anticipate that the portion of our total product revenue from
international sales will continue to increase as we further enhance our focus on
developing new products, establishing new channel partners, strengthening our
presence in key growth areas, complying with regional environmental regulatory
standards, and improving product localization with country-specific product
documentation and marketing materials.
Distributors
We sell
our products directly to approximately 70 distributors throughout the world.
Distributors purchase our products at a discount from list price and resell them
on a non-exclusive basis to independent systems integrators, dealers, and
value-added resellers. Our distributors maintain their own inventory and
accounts receivable and are required to provide technical and non-technical
support for our products to the next level of distribution participants. We work
with our distributors to establish appropriate inventory stocking levels. We
also work with our distributors to maintain relationships with our existing
systems integrators, dealers, and value-added resellers.
Independent
Integrators, Dealers, and Resellers
Our
distributors sell our products worldwide to approximately 1,000 independent
systems integrators, telephony value-added resellers, IT value-added resellers,
and PC dealers on a non-exclusive basis. While dealers, resellers, and systems
integrators all sell our products directly to the end-users, systems integrators
typically add significant value to each sale by combining our products with
products from other manufacturers as part of an integrated system solution.
Dealers and value-added resellers usually buy our products from distributors and
may bundle our products with products from other manufacturers for resale to the
end-user. We maintain close working ties in the field with our reseller partners
and offer them education and training on all of our products.
Marketing
Much of
our marketing effort is done in conjunction with our channel partners, who
provide leverage for ClearOne in reaching customers and prospective customers
worldwide. We also regularly attend industry forums and exhibit our products at
trade shows, including the following:
·
|
InfoComm
– the AV industry’s largest trade show. In June 2008 we had a strong
presence at InfoComm, where we highlighted a significant number of new
products.
|
·
|
National
Systems Contractors Association – this show focuses on the sound
reinforcement industry, and we highlight our professional audio
conferencing products.
|
·
|
A/V
Integrator trade shows – we regularly invest and participate in trade
shows hosted by our partners, namely system
integrators.
|
In
addition, there are multiple regional and international shows that we attend
along with our channel partners. These shows provide exposure for ClearOne’s
brand and products to the wide audience of show attendees.
We also
have a highly-focused public relations effort to get editorial coverage on
ClearOne’s products in industry and non-industry publications
alike.
Customers
We do not
believe that any end-user accounted for more than 10 percent of our total
revenue during fiscal 2008, 2007, or 2006. In fiscal 2008, revenues included
sales to three distributors that represented approximately 60 percent of total
revenue. Each of these three distributors, NewComm
Distributing, Starin Marketing and VSO
Marketing, accounted for more than 10 percent of consolidated
revenue. As discussed above, these distributors facilitate product sales to a
large number of resellers, and subsequently to their end-users. Nevertheless,
the loss of one or more distributors could reduce revenue and have a material
adverse effect on our business and results of operations. As of June 30, 2008,
our shipped orders on which we had not recognized revenue were $4.6 million and
our backlog of unshipped orders was $1.1 million.
Competition
The
conferencing products market is characterized by intense competition and rapidly
evolving technology. We compete with businesses having substantially greater
financial, research and product development, manufacturing, marketing, and other
resources. If we are not able to continually design, manufacture, and
successfully market new or enhanced products or services that are comparable or
superior to those provided by our competitors and at comparable or better
prices, we could experience pricing pressures and reduced sales, gross profit
margins, profits, and market share, each of which could have a materially
adverse effect on our business.
Our
competitors vary within each product category. We believe we are able to
differentiate ourselves and therefore successfully compete as a result of the
high audio quality of our products resulting from our proprietary audio signal
processing technologies and technical support services as well as the strength
of our brand, particularly in the professional conferencing space.
We
believe the principal factors driving sales are the following:
·
|
our
ability to effectively communicate the differentiated value-added features
of our products through sales and marketing
efforts;
|
·
|
product
design, quality, and functionality of
products;
|
·
|
establishment
of brand name recognition;
|
·
|
access
to and penetration of distribution
channels;
|
·
|
quality
of customer support; and
|
·
|
a
significant customer base.
|
In the
professional audio conferencing systems and sound reinforcement markets, our
main competitors include Polycom, Biamp Systems, Lectrosonics, Peavey, Shure,
and WideBand Solutions, with several other companies potentially poised to enter
the market. According to industry sources, we have held the largest share of the
installed segment of the conferencing systems market for many years, which we
target with our professional audio conferencing products. ClearOne uniquely
contributed to the professional conferencing space with the introduction of the
Audio Perfect (“AP”) product line a number of years ago, followed by the XAP and
continue the tradition of offering state of the art, differentiated professional
product with the introduction of Converge Pro. We believe we continue
to enjoy a strong reputation with the AV integrators and AV consultants for our
product features, audio quality, and technical support.
We
believe we created a new audio conferencing category with the introduction of
the RAV platform, which we call premium conferencing. RAV is a unique product
with capabilities we do not believe can be found on any other competing
system.
In the
tabletop conferencing space, our primary competitors are Polycom, Aethra,
Konftel, LifeSize, Panasonic, and a number of other smaller manufacturers.
Despite having been in this space for a relatively short time, we quickly grew
and continue to enjoy the number two position worldwide, second to the
incumbent, Polycom. We believe we have obtained the number two position as a
result of differentiating our MAX products on a number of fronts; they are more
competitively priced than Polycom’s comparable products; MAX encapsulates our
proprietary digital signal processing technologies which we believe are the most
advanced in the industry; and our unique ability to attach or daisy chain
multiple phones together for increased coverage has given us opportunities to
solve customer problems that our competition cannot currently
solve.
The new
personal conferencing space has seen a number of new entries. Our primary
competitors in the personal conferencing space are Polycom, Actiontec, Iogear,
mVox, Phoenix, and USRobotics. We believe that our CHAT 50 and CHAT 150 offer
unique and distinct advantages in their superior audio performance and their
abilities to connect to multiple devices and to be used in multiple scenarios.
Our microphones compete with the products of Audio Technica, Global Media,
Harmon Music, Shure, and others. Our conferencing furniture products compete
primarily with the products of Accuwood, Comlink, and Video Furniture
International.
In each
of the markets in which we compete, many of our competitors may have access to
greater financial, technical, manufacturing, and marketing resources, and as a
result they may respond more quickly or effectively to new technologies and
changes in customer preferences. We cannot provide assurance that we will
continue to compete effectively in the markets we serve.
Regulatory
Environment
Regulations
regarding the materials used in manufacturing, the process of disposing of
electronic equipment and the efficient use of energy require additional time to
obtain regulatory approvals of new products in international markets. Such
regulations may impact our ability to expand our sales in a timely and
cost-effective manner and as a result our business could be harmed.
Sources
and Availability of Raw Materials
Most of
the components that we purchase from various vendors are readily available from
a number of sources. Alternative sourcing of various components is continually
underway. Vendors are qualified by Corporate Quality Assurance. We have a vendor
quality monitoring program that includes routinely checking incoming material
for conformance to specifications, as required per written
procedures.
Seasonality
Our audio
conferencing products revenue has historically been strongest during the second
and fourth quarters. There can be no assurance that any historic sales patterns
will continue and, as a result, sales for any prior quarter are not necessarily
indicative of the sales to be expected in any future quarter.
Product
Development
We are
committed to research and product development and view our continued investment
in research and product development as a key ingredient to our long-term
business success. Our research and product development expenditures were
approximately $7.1 million in fiscal 2008, $7.5 million in fiscal 2007, and $8.3
million in fiscal 2006.
Our core
competencies in research and product development include many audio
technologies, including telephone echo cancellation, acoustic echo cancellation,
and noise cancellation. Our ability to use digital signal processing technology
to perform audio processing operations is also a core competency. We also have
in-house expertise in wireless technologies, VoIP, and software and network
application development. We believe that ongoing development of our core
technological competencies is vital to maintaining and increasing future sales
of our products and to enhancing new and existing products.
Manufacturing
Currently,
all of our products are manufactured by third-party manufacturers.
We
believe the long-term benefits from our manufacturing outsourcing strategy
include the following:
·
|
Avoidance
of a significant investment in upgrading our manufacturing
infrastructure;
|
·
|
RoHS-compliant
manufacturing facilities;
|
·
|
Scalability
in our manufacturing process without major investment or major
restructuring costs;
|
·
|
Achievement
of future cost reductions on manufacturing costs and inventory costs based
upon increased economies of scale in material and labor;
and
|
·
|
Manufacturing
world class quality products by partnering with outsource manufacturers
certified with International Organization of Standardization (ISO)
processes.
|
Intellectual
Property and Other Proprietary Rights
We
believe that our success depends in part on our ability to protect our
proprietary rights. We rely on a combination of patent, copyright, trademark,
and trade secret laws and confidentiality agreements and processes to protect
our proprietary rights. The laws of foreign countries may not protect our
intellectual property to the same degree as the laws of the United
States.
We
generally require our employees, customers, and potential distribution
participants to enter into confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements before
we disclose any confidential aspect of our technology, services, or business. In
addition, our employees are required to assign to us any proprietary
information, inventions, or other technology created during the term of their
employment with us. However, these precautions may not be sufficient to protect
us from misappropriation or infringement of our intellectual
property.
We
currently have about 30 patents that are issued, pending, or applied for that
cover our conferencing products and technologies. The expiration dates of issued
patents range from 2018 to 2025. We hold or have filed for over 70 trademarks.
Registered trademarks include ClearOne, XAP, MAX, AccuMic, Audio Perfect,
Distributed Echo Cancellation, Gentner, and others. We have also filed for
trademarks for RAV, Converge, Chat, and others. We have received or filed for
registered copyrights of certain of our source code for acoustic echo
cancellation and other related audio signal processing algorithms.
Employees
As of
June 30, 2008, we had 103 employees, 100 of whom were employed on a full-time
basis, with 36 in sales, marketing, and customer support; 37 in product
development; 16 in operations support; and 14 in administration, including
finance. Of these employees, 86 were located in our Salt Lake City office, 12 in
other U.S. locations, two in the United Kingdom and three in Asia. None of our
employees are subject to a collective bargaining agreement and we believe our
relationship with our employees is good. We occasionally hire
contractors with specific technology skill sets to meet project
timelines.
Dispositions
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2001, we completed the sale of the assets of the
remote control portion of our RFM/Broadcast division to Burk Technology, Inc..
During fiscal 2005, we sold our conferencing services segment to Premiere and we
sold our Canadian audiovisual integration services business to 6351352 Canada
Inc. During fiscal 2006, we sold our document and educational camera product
line to Ken-A-Vision Manufacturing Co. Inc. Each disposition is summarized below
and is discussed in detail in the footnotes to the June 30, 2008 consolidated
financial statements included in this report.
Sale of Assets to
Burk Technology. On April 12, 2001, we sold the assets of the remote
control portion of our RFM/Broadcast division to Burk, a privately held
developer and manufacturer of broadcast facility control systems products, for
$750,000 in cash at closing, $1.8 million in the form of a seven-year promissory
note, with interest at the rate of 9.0 percent per year, and up to $700,000 as a
commission over a period of up to seven years. We realized a pre-tax gain on the
sale of $1.3 million for fiscal 2006, $187,000 for fiscal 2005, and $93,000 for
fiscal 2004. On August 22, 2005, we entered into a Mutual Release and Waiver
Agreement with Burk pursuant to which Burk paid us $1.3 million in full
satisfaction of the promissory note, which included a discount of $119,000. As
part of the Mutual Release and Waiver Agreement, we waived any right to future
commission payments from Burk and we granted mutual releases to one another with
respect to claims and liabilities. Accordingly, the total pre-tax gain on the
sale was approximately $2.4 million.
Sale of our
Conferencing Services. During July 2004, we sold
our conferencing services business segment to Premiere. Consideration for the
sale consisted of $21.3 million in cash. Of the purchase price, $300,000 was
placed into a working capital escrow account and an addition $1.0 million was
placed into an 18 month indemnity escrow account. We received the $300,000
working capital escrow funds approximately 90 days after the execution date of
the agreement. We received the $1.0 million in the indemnity escrow account
together with the $30,000 in related interest income in January 2006.
Additionally, $1.4 million of the proceeds was utilized to pay off equipment
leases pertaining to assets being conveyed to Premiere. We realized a pre-tax
gain on the sale of $1.0 million in fiscal 2006 and $17.4 million in fiscal
2005.
Sale of OM Video
– Canadian Audiovisual Integration Services. During March 2005, we sold
all of the issued and outstanding stock of our Canadian subsidiary, ClearOne
Communications of Canada, Inc. (“ClearOne Canada”) to 6351352 Canada Inc., a
Canada corporation. ClearOne Canada owned all the issued and outstanding stock
of Stechyson Electronics, Ltd., which conducts business under the name OM Video.
We agreed to sell the stock of ClearOne Canada for $200,000 in cash; a $1.3
million note receivable over a 15-month period, with interest accruing on the
unpaid balance at the rate of 5.3 percent per year; and contingent consideration
ranging from 3.0 percent to 4.0 percent of related gross revenues over a
five-year period. In June 2005, we were advised that the OM Purchaser had
settled an action brought by the former employer of certain of OM Purchaser’s
owners and employees alleging violation of non-competition agreements. The
settlement reportedly involved a cash payment and an agreement not to sell
certain products for a period of one year. Based on an analysis of the facts and
circumstances that existed at the end of fiscal 2005, and considering the
guidance from Topic 5U of the SEC Rules and Regulations, “Gain Recognition on
the Sale of a Business or Operating Assets to a Highly Leveraged Entity,” the
gain is being recognized as cash is collected (as collection was not reasonably
assured). Through December 31, 2005, all required payments had been made
however, 6351352 Canada Inc. failed to make any subsequent, required payments
under the note receivable until June 30, 2006, when we received a payment of
$50,000. During fiscal 2007, we reevaluated our options and concluded that its
best course of action was to enforce our security and appoint a receiver over
the assets of OM Video.
Sale of our
Document and Educational Camera Product Line. In August 2006, we sold our
document and educational camera product line to Ken-A-Vision Manufacturing Co.
Inc., a privately held manufacturer of camera solutions for education, audio
visual, research, and manufacturing applications. Under the terms of the
transaction, Ken-A-Vision received the intellectual property rights to
ClearOne's camera technologies, as well as ownership of current inventory. The
sale price was $635,000 payable in cash and a $318,000 note receivable payable
over 24 months.
Investors
should carefully consider the risks described below. The risks described below
are not the only ones we face and there are risks that we are not presently
aware of or that we currently believe are immaterial that may also impair our
business operations. Any of these risks could harm our business. The trading
price of our common stock could decline significantly due to any of these risks,
and investors may lose all or part of their investment. In assessing these
risks, investors should also refer to the other information contained or
incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our June
30, 2008 consolidated financial statements and related notes.
Risks
Relating to Our Business
We
face intense competition in all markets for our products and services; our
operating results will be adversely affected if we cannot compete effectively
against other companies.
The
markets for our products and services are characterized by intense competition
and pricing pressures and rapid technological change. We compete with businesses
having substantially greater financial, research and product development,
manufacturing, marketing, and other resources. If we are not able to continually
design, manufacture, and successfully introduce new or enhanced products or
services that are comparable or superior to those provided by our competitors
and at comparable or better prices, we could experience pricing pressures and
reduced sales, gross profit margins, profits, and market share, each of which
could have a materially adverse effect on our business.
Difficulties
in estimating customer demand in our products segment could harm our profit
margins.
Orders
from our distributors and other distribution participants are based on demand
from end-users. Prospective end-user demand is difficult to measure. This means
that our revenue during any fiscal quarter could be adversely impacted by low
end-user demand, which could in turn negatively affect orders we receive from
distributors and dealers. Our expectations for both short- and long-term future
net revenues are based on our own estimates of future demand.
Revenue
for any particular time period are difficult to predict with any degree of
certainty. We usually ship products within a short time after we receive an
order; so consequently, unshipped backlog has not been a good indicator of
future revenue. We believe that the current level of backlog will fluctuate
dependent in part on our ability to forecast revenue mix and plan our
manufacturing accordingly. A significant portion of our customers’ orders are
received during the last month of the quarter. We budget the amount of our
expenses based on our revenue estimates. If our estimates of sales are not
accurate and we experience unforeseen variability in our revenue and operating
results, we may be unable to adjust our expense levels accordingly and our gross
profit and results of operations will be adversely affected. Higher inventory
levels or stock shortages may also result from difficulties in estimating
customer demand.
Our
sales depend to a certain extent on government funding and
regulation.
In the
audio conferencing products market, the revenue generated from sales of our
audio conferencing products for distance learning and courtroom facilities
depend on government funding. In the event government funding for
such initiatives was reduced or became unavailable, our sales could be
negatively impacted. Additionally, many of our products are subject to
governmental regulations. New regulations could significantly impact sales in an
adverse manner.
Environmental
laws and regulations subject us to a number of risks and could result in
significant costs and impact on revenue
Regulations
regarding the materials used in manufacturing, the process of disposing of
electronic equipment and the efficient use of energy require additional time to
obtain regulatory approvals of new products in international markets. Such
regulations may impact our ability to expand our sales in a timely and
cost-effective manner and as a result our business could be harmed.
Product
development delays or defects could harm our competitive position and reduce our
revenue.
We have,
in the past, and may again experience, technical difficulties and delays with
the development and introduction of new products. Many of the products we
develop contain sophisticated and complicated circuitry, software and
components, and utilize manufacturing techniques involving new technologies.
Potential difficulties in the development process that could be experienced by
us include difficulty in the following:
·
|
meeting
required specifications and regulatory
standards;
|
·
|
meeting
market expectations for
performance;
|
·
|
hiring
and keeping a sufficient number of skilled
developers;
|
·
|
obtaining
prototype products at anticipated cost
levels;
|
·
|
having
the ability to identify problems or product defects in the development
cycle; and
|
·
|
achieving
necessary manufacturing
efficiencies.
|
Once new
products reach the market, they may have defects, or may be met by unanticipated
new competitive products, which could adversely affect market acceptance of
these products and our reputation. If we are not able to manage and minimize
such potential difficulties, our business and results of operations could be
negatively affected.
Our
profitability may be adversely affected by our continuing dependence on our
distribution channels.
We market
our products primarily through a network of distributors who in turn sell our
products to systems integrators, dealers, and value-added resellers. All of our
agreements with such distributors and other distribution participants are
non-exclusive, terminable at will by either party, and generally short-term. No
assurances can be given that any or all such distributors or other distribution
participants will continue their relationship with us. Distributors and to a
lesser extent systems integrators, dealers, and value-added resellers cannot
easily be replaced and the loss of revenues and our inability to reduce expenses
to compensate for the loss of revenue could adversely affect our net revenue and
profit margins.
Although
we rely on our distribution channels to sell our products, our distributors and
other distribution participants are not obligated to devote any specified amount
of time, resources, or efforts to the marketing of our products or to sell a
specified number of our products. There are no prohibitions on distributors or
other resellers offering products that are competitive with our products and
some do offer competitive products. The support of our products by distributors
and other distribution participants may depend on the competitive strength of
our products and the price incentives we offer for their support. If our
distributors and other distribution participants are not committed to our
products, our revenue and profit margins may be adversely affected.
Additionally,
we offer our distributors price protection on their inventory of our products.
If we reduce the list price of our products, we will compensate our distributors
for the respective products that remain in their inventory on the date the price
adjustment becomes effective provided that they have taken delivery of the
product(s) within the last 35 days. Our net revenue and profit margins could
adversely be affected if we reduce product price(s) significantly and/or
distributors happen to have significant inventory on-hand of the affected
product at the time of a price reduction. Further, if we do not have sufficient
cash resources to compensate distributors on terms satisfactory to them or us,
our price protection obligations may prevent us from reacting quickly to
competitive market conditions.
Reporting
of channel inventory by certain distributors.
We defer
recognition of revenue from product sales to distributors until the return
privilege has expired, which approximates when product is sold-through to
customers of our distributors. We evaluate, at each quarter-end, the inventory
in the channel through information provided by certain of our distributors. We
use this information along with our judgment and estimates to determine the
amount of inventory in the entire channel, for all customers and for all
inventory items, and the appropriate revenue and cost of goods sold associated
with those channel products. We cannot guarantee that the third party data, as
reported, or that our assumptions and judgments regarding total channel
inventory revenue and cost of goods sold will be accurate. We periodically audit
a limited number of distributors.
We
depend on an outsourced manufacturing strategy.
We
outsource the manufacture of all of our products to third-party manufacturers
located in both the U.S. and Asia. If any of these manufacturers experience
difficulties in obtaining sufficient supplies of components, component prices
significantly exceed anticipated costs, an interruption in their operations, or
otherwise suffer capacity constraints, we would experience a delay in shipping
these products which would have a negative impact on our revenue. Should there
be any disruption in services due to natural disaster, economic or political
difficulties, quarantines, transportation restrictions, acts of terror, or other
restrictions associated with infectious diseases, or other similar events, or
any other reason, such disruption would have a material adverse effect on our
business. Operating in the international environment exposes us to certain
inherent risks, including unexpected changes in regulatory requirements and
tariffs, and potentially adverse tax consequences, which could materially affect
our results of operations. Currently, we have no second source of manufacturing
for a portion of our products.
The cost
of delivered product from our contract manufacturers is a direct function of
their ability to buy components at a competitive price and to realize
efficiencies and economies of scale within their overall business structure. If
they are unsuccessful in driving efficient cost models, our delivered costs
could rise, affecting our profitability and ability to compete. In addition, if
the contract manufacturers are unable to achieve greater operational
efficiencies, delivery schedules for new product development and current product
delivery could be negatively impacted.
We
depend on an outsourced fulfillment strategy.
During
January 2008, we commenced the use of a third party supply chain management firm
who manages the receiving, storing, picking, packing, shipping and inventory
management of the majority of our products. If this firm experiences
difficulties or interruptions in its operations preventing it from adequately
fulfilling our products, we would experience a delay in shipping product to our
customers which would negatively impact our revenues. Should there be any
disruption in the third party’s services as a result of natural disaster,
economic or political difficulties, quarantines, labor disputes, transportation
restrictions, acts of terror or other similar events, such disruption would have
a material adverse effect on our business. Currently, we do not have a second
source for fulfillment of the majority of our products.
Product
obsolescence could harm demand for our products and could adversely affect our
revenue and our results of operations.
Our
industry is subject to rapid and frequent technological innovations that could
render existing technologies in our products obsolete and thereby decrease
market demand for such products. If any of our products become slow-moving or
obsolete and the recorded value of our inventory is greater than its market
value, we will be required to write down the value of our inventory to its fair
market value, which would adversely affect our results of operations. In limited
circumstances, we are required to purchase components that our outsourced
manufacturers use to produce and assemble our products. Should technological
innovations render these components obsolete, we will be required to write down
the value of this inventory, which could adversely affect our results of
operations.
If
we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights or have insufficient
proprietary rights, our business would be materially impaired.
We
currently rely primarily on a combination of trade secrets, copyrights,
trademarks, patents, patents pending, and nondisclosure agreements to establish
and protect our proprietary rights in our products. No assurances can be given
that others will not independently develop similar technologies, or duplicate or
design around aspects of our technology. In addition, we cannot assure that any
patent or registered trademark owned by us will not be invalidated, circumvented
or challenged, or that the rights granted hereunder will provide competitive
advantages to us. Litigation may be necessary to enforce our intellectual
property rights. We believe our products and other proprietary rights do not
infringe upon any proprietary rights of third parties; however, we cannot assure
that third parties will not assert infringement claims in the future. Our
industry is characterized by vigorous protection of intellectual property
rights. Such claims and the resulting litigation are expensive and could divert
management’s attention, regardless of the merit of such claims. In the event of
a claim, we might be required to license third-party technology or redesign our
products, which may not be possible or economically feasible.
We
currently hold only a limited number of patents. To the extent that we have
patentable technology for which we have not filed patent applications, others
may be able to use such technology or even gain priority over us by patenting
such technology themselves.
International
sales account for a significant portion of our net revenue and risks inherent in
international sales could harm our business.
International
sales represent a significant portion of our total product revenue. We
anticipate that the portion of our total product revenue from international
sales will continue to increase as we further enhance our focus on developing
new products for new markets, establishing new distribution partners,
strengthening our presence in emerging economies, and improving product
localization with country-specific product documentation and marketing
materials. Our international business is subject to the financial and operating
risks of conducting business internationally, including the
following:
·
|
unexpected
changes in, or the imposition of, additional legislative or regulatory
requirements;
|
·
|
unique
environmental regulations;
|
·
|
fluctuating
exchange rates;
|
·
|
tariffs
and other barriers;
|
·
|
difficulties
in staffing and managing foreign sales
operations;
|
·
|
import
and export restrictions;
|
·
|
greater
difficulties in accounts receivable collection and longer payment
cycles;
|
·
|
potentially
adverse tax consequences;
|
·
|
potential
hostilities and changes in diplomatic and trade relationships;
and
|
·
|
disruption
in services due to natural disaster, economic or political difficulties,
quarantines, transportation, or other restrictions associated with
infectious diseases.
|
We
may not be able to hire and retain qualified key and highly-skilled technical
employees, which could affect our ability to compete effectively and may cause
our revenue and profitability to decline.
We depend
on our ability to hire and retain qualified key and highly skilled employees to
manage, research and develop, market, and service new and existing products.
Competition for such key and highly-skilled employees is intense, and we may not
be successful in attracting or retaining such personnel. To succeed, we must
hire and retain employees who are highly skilled in the rapidly changing
communications and Internet technologies. Individuals who have the skills and
can perform the services we need to provide our products and services are in
great demand. Because the competition for qualified employees in our industry is
intense, hiring and retaining employees with the skills we need is both
time-consuming and expensive. We might not be able to hire enough skilled
employees or retain the employees we do hire. In addition, provisions of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and related rules of the SEC impose heightened
personal liability on some of our key employees. The threat of such liability
could make it more difficult to identify, hire and retain qualified key and
highly-skilled employees. We have relied on our ability to grant stock options
as a means of recruiting and retaining key employees. Recent accounting
regulations requiring the expensing of stock options will impair our future
ability to provide these incentives without incurring associated compensation
costs. Our inability to hire and retain employees with the skills we seek could
hinder our ability to sell our existing products, systems, or services or to
develop new products, systems, or services with a consequent adverse effect on
our business, results of operations, financial position, or
liquidity.
We
rely on third-party technology and license agreements.
We have
licensing agreements with various suppliers for software and hardware
incorporated into our products. These third-party licenses may not continue to
be available to us on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. The termination
or impairment of these licenses could result in delays of current product
shipments or delays or reductions in new product introductions until equivalent
designs could be developed, licensed, and integrated, if at all possible, which
would have a material adverse effect on our business.
We
may have difficulty in collecting outstanding receivables.
We grant
credit to substantially all of our customers without requiring collateral. In
times of economic uncertainty, the risks relating to the granting of such credit
would typically increase. Although we monitor and mitigate the risks
associated with our credit policies, we cannot ensure that such mitigation will
be effective. We have experienced losses due to customers failing to meet their
obligations. Future losses could be significant and, if incurred, could harm our
business and have a material adverse effect on our operating results and
financial position.
Interruptions
to our business could adversely affect our operations.
As with
any company, our operations are at risk of being interrupted by earthquake,
fire, flood, and other natural and human-caused disasters, including disease and
terrorist attacks. Our operations are also at risk of power loss,
telecommunications failure, and other infrastructure and technology based
problems. To help guard against such risks, we carry business interruption loss
insurance to help compensate us for losses that may occur.
Risks
Relating to Share Ownership
Our
stock price fluctuates as a result of the conduct of our business and stock
market fluctuations.
The
market price of our common stock has experienced significant fluctuations and
may continue to fluctuate significantly. The market price of our common stock
may be significantly affected by a variety of factors, including the
following:
·
|
statements
or changes in opinions, ratings, or earnings estimates made by brokerage
firms or industry analysts relating to the market in which we do business
or relating to us specifically;
|
·
|
disparity
between our reported results and the projections of
analysts;
|
·
|
the
shift in sales mix of products that we currently sell to a sales mix of
lower-gross profit product
offerings;
|
·
|
the
level and mix of inventory levels held by our
distributors;
|
·
|
the
announcement of new products or product enhancements by us or our
competitors;
|
·
|
technological
innovations by us or our
competitors;
|
·
|
success
in meeting targeted availability dates for new or redesigned
products;
|
·
|
the
ability to profitably and efficiently manage our supplies of products and
key components;
|
·
|
the
ability to maintain profitable relationships with our
customers;
|
·
|
the
ability to maintain an appropriate cost
structure;
|
·
|
quarterly
variations in our results of
operations;
|
·
|
general
consumer confidence or general market conditions or market conditions
specific to technology industries;
|
·
|
domestic
and international economic
conditions;
|
·
|
unexpected
changes in regulatory requirements and
tariffs;
|
·
|
our
ability to report financial information in a timely manner;
and
|
·
|
the
markets in which our stock is
traded.
|
Rights
to acquire our common stock could result in dilution to other holders of our
common stock.
As of
June 30, 2008, we had outstanding options to acquire approximately 1.2 million
shares of our common stock at a weighted average exercise price of $5.85 per
share. An additional 996,000 shares remain available for grant under our 2007
Plan. During the terms of these options, the holders thereof will
have the opportunity to profit from an increase in the market price of the
common stock. The existence of these options may adversely affect the
terms on which we can obtain additional financing, and the holders of these
options can be expected to exercise such options at a time when we, in all
likelihood, would be able to obtain additional capital by offering shares of our
common stock on terms more favorable to us than those provided by the exercise
of these options.
Sales
of additional shares of our common stock could have a negative effect on the
market price of our common stock.
Sales of
substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market could adversely
affect prevailing market prices and could impair our ability to raise capital
through the sale of our equity securities. Most shares of common
stock currently outstanding are eligible for sale in the public market, subject
in certain cases to compliance with the requirements of Rule 144 under the
securities laws. Shares issued upon the exercise of stock options
granted under our stock option plan generally will be eligible for sale in the
public market. We also have the authority to issue additional shares
of common stock and shares of one or more series of preferred
stock. The issuance of such shares could dilute the voting power of
the currently outstanding shares of our common stock and could dilute earnings
per share.
We
have previously identified material weaknesses in our internal
controls.
In our
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2006, we reported and identified a
material weakness in our internal controls. Although we believe we have remedied
this weakness through the commitment of considerable resources, we are always at
risk that any future failure of our own internal controls or the internal
control at any of our outsourced manufacturers or partners could result in
additional reported material weaknesses. Any future failures of our internal
controls could have a material impact on our market capitalization, results of
operations, or financial position, or have other adverse
consequences.
Not
applicable.
We
currently occupy a 36,279 square-foot facility in Salt Lake City, Utah under the
terms of an operating lease expiring in December 2013 which supports our
principal administrative, sales, marketing, customer support, and research and
product development facility. We also occupy an approximate 6,500 square-foot
facility in Salt Lake City under the terms of an operating lease expiring in
December 2011 which supports our repair center. Finally, we lease an approximate
2,000 square-foot warehouse in Hong Kong under the terms of an operating lease
expiring in February 2010 which supports our partners and customers located in
the Asia-Pacific region.
We
believe our current facilities are adequate to meet our needs for the
foreseeable future and that suitable additional or alternative space will be
available in the future on commercially reasonable terms as needed.
In
addition to the legal proceedings described below, we are also involved from
time to time in various claims and other legal proceedings which arise in the
normal course of our business. Such matters are subject to many
uncertainties and outcomes that are not predictable. However, based
on the information available to us and after discussions with legal counsel, we
do not believe any such other proceedings will have a material, adverse effect
on our business, results of operations, financial position, or liquidity, except
as described below.
Former Officer
Indemnification. On July 25, 2007, the U.S. Attorney’s Office
for the District of Utah indicted two of our former officers, Frances Flood and
Susie Strohm, for allegedly causing us to issue materially misstated financial
statements for our 2001 and 2002 fiscal years. On January 31, 2008,
the U.S. Attorney’s Office filed a Second Superseding Indictment further
alleging perjury in connection with the prior investigation by the SEC into the
alleged misstatements. We are cooperating fully with the U.S.
Attorney’s Office in this matter and have been advised that we are neither a
target nor a subject of the investigation or indictment. In December
2003, ClearOne entered into indemnification agreements with each former officer,
requiring payment of all reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred in
defending against the charges in certain circumstances consistent with and
subject to limitations under applicable law. To date, we have paid
approximately $1.8 million in reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to defend
against the charges. As of August 21, 2008, these former officers have requested
advancement of an additional $365,000 in legal fees and costs incurred as of
that date, which amounts we have not paid. On August 21, 2008, Ms.
Strohm and her counsel filed a lawsuit in the Third Judicial District Court in
Salt Lake City, Utah seeking a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief to
compel us to continue to advance Ms. Strohm’s attorney’s fees and costs to
defend against the charges, plus interest for amounts previously requested and
not paid. Also on August 21, 2008, Ms. Flood filed a lawsuit in
Federal District Court for the District of Utah, seeking similar relief. A trial
date has been set for October 20, 2008 although we were informed on August 29,
2008 that the attorney’s representing the former officers filed a joint motion
to continue the trial.
We have
accrued for legal fees and costs of the probable amount the Company was able to
estimate of its contingent liability under the indemnification agreements at
June 30, 2008. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies”, we have accrued a total of $3.3
million, the balance of which was about $1.5 million at June 30, 2008
representing the probable amount that, as of the date of the financial
statements, could be reasonably estimated of our contingent liability, through
trial, under the indemnification agreements if required under applicable
law. The accrual is management’s best estimate of our contingent
liability as of the date of the issuance of its financial
statements. In accordance with SFAS No. 5, we will adjust our
contingent liability, as necessary, to reflect the probable amount that can be
reasonably estimated. Our actual liability may be higher or lower
than management’s estimate upon final resolution of the matter. We
will adjust our contingent liability, as needed, so that it remains an estimable
and probable amount of our contingent financial liability as of the date of
issuance of the applicable financial statements.
Theft of
Intellectual Property and Copyright Complaints. In January 2007, we
filed a lawsuit in the Third Judicial District Court, Salt Lake County, State of
Utah against WideBand Solutions, Inc. and two of its principals, one former
employee named Dr. Jun Yang, and one previously affiliated with an entity which
sold certain assets to us (the “Intellectual Property
Case”). ClearOne also brought claims against Biamp Systems
Corporation, Inc. The matter was subsequently removed to federal
court, the United States District Court, District of Utah, Central Division. The
case is styled ClearOne
Communications, Inc. v. Jun Yang, et. al. Civil No. 2:07-co-37
TC. The Complaint brings claims against different combinations of the
defendants for, among other things, misappropriation of certain trade secrets,
breach of contract, conversion, unjust enrichment and intentional interference
with business and contractual relations, primarily in relation to certain
algorithms and computer code. The relief being sought by us includes
an order enjoining the defendants from further use of our trade secrets and an
award consisting of, among other things, compensation and damages related to the
unjust enrichment of the defendants. The court subsequently granted leave to add
a third WideBand principal as a defendant to the case. In August 2007, we filed
a motion for a preliminary injunction in the Intellectual Property Case, in the
United States District Court, District of Utah, seeking to enjoin Wideband
Solutions, Inc. from licensing certain technology we believe constitutes our
intellectual property and trade secrets to Harman Music Group,
Inc. On September 13, 2007, the court in the Intellectual Property
Case granted ClearOne leave to add Harman and a former ClearOne employee working
for Harman as defendants in that case. For procedural reasons, these
claims against Harman and the Harman employee were refiled in Utah state court,
the Third Judicial District Court for Salt Lake County, on September 18, 2007
(the “Harman Case”). Like the Intellectual Property Case, the Harman
Case also brings claims related to the theft and misuse of ClearOne’s
confidential and trade secret information. On October 30, 2007, the
Chief Judge of the United States District Court in the Intellectual Property
Case, the Honorable Tena Campbell, issued a Memorandum Decision and Order (the
“Injunction Order”). The Injunction Order “GRANTS ClearOne’s motion
for a Preliminary Injunction,” and orders that “Dr. Yang, as well as his agents,
servants, officers, employees, entities and those acting under his direction and
control, are hereby enjoined from working on or delivering any computer code –
either source code or object code – to Harman until the completion of the
trial.” In reaching its decision, the Court found that Dr. Yang was
subject to a valid and enforceable Confidentiality, Non-Competition, and
Invention Assignment Agreement (the “NDA”), and that ClearOne had demonstrated
“a substantial likelihood that ClearOne will succeed on its claims that Dr. Yang
violated the NDA” and derived the code that WideBand was attempting to license
to Harman from code belonging to ClearOne. The Injunction Order is
Docket Entry 572. On November 5, 2007, the Honorable Tena Campbell
issued an order establishing the amount for the bond to be posted by ClearOne in
conjunction with the Court’s grant of ClearOne’s motion for a preliminary
injunction. The bond was set in the amount of $907,909. In
accordance with the order, we placed the bond with the clerk of the Court on
November 6, 2007. On June 20, 2008, the Honorable Tena Campbell issued an order
reducing the bond to $210,000.
During
October 2007, we filed a second action against WideBand and the same three
principals named as defendants in the Intellectual Property Case, this time
alleging copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement, and
contributory copyright infringement (the “Copyright Case”). The claims in the
Copyright Case arise out of a copyright issued to the Company for the same
intellectual property, including the algorithms and computer code that is the
subject of the claims in the Intellectual Property Case. The relief being sought
by us includes an order enjoining the defendants from further use of our
copyrighted material, and an award consisting of, among other things,
compensation and damages related to the copyright infringement.
During
June 2008, ClearOne filed a separate action in the United States District Court,
District of Utah, Central Division, against WideBand Solutions, Inc., a Georgia
corporation ("WideBand Georgia") and Donald Bowers, and the Complaint brings
claims, among others, for declaratory judgment, fraudulent transfer under Utah
Code Ann. § 25-6-1, et. seq., and misappropriation of trade
secrets.
During
June 2008, the United States District Court entered an order granting ClearOne's
request for a temporary restraining order ("TRO") against any sale or transfer
of ownership of certain assets of WideBand to WideBand Solutions, Inc., a
Georgia Corporation. The TRO provides that "ClearOne has met the
elements necessary for issuance of a TRO to preserve the status quo," and
imposes certain prohibitions against any sale or transfer of ownership of
certain of the Defendants' assets, consisting of certain computer code and
algorithms related thereto. The TRO also states that none of the Defendants'
profits from the Disputed Code shall be transferred or conveyed to the Georgia
entity.
Subsequently,
during July 2008, ClearOne filed a motion for an additional TRO, to prevent the
sale or transfer of any assets not already subject to the court’s June 2008
TRO. On July 10, 2008, the court was informed that the proposed sale
of certain assets and/or business interests to WideBand Georgia had been
rescinded, and on July 10, 2008, the court denied ClearOne’s July 2, 2008
application for a TRO as “moot.” The June 26, 2008 TRO remains in
effect.
The Shareholder Derivative Actions.
Between March and August 2003, four shareholder derivative actions
were filed in the Third Judicial District Court of Salt Lake County, State of
Utah, by certain of our shareholders against various present and past officers
and directors and against Ernst & Young. The complaints asserted
allegations similar to those asserted in the SEC complaint that was filed on
January 15, 2003 with regard to alleged improper revenue recognition practices
and the shareholders’ class action that was filed on June 30, 2003 and also
alleged that the defendant directors and officers violated their fiduciary
duties to us by causing or allowing us to recognize revenue in violation of U.S.
GAAP and to issue materially misstated financial statements and that Ernst &
Young breached its professional responsibilities to us and acted in violation of
U.S. GAAP and generally accepted auditing standards by failing to identify or
prevent the alleged revenue recognition violations and by issuing unqualified
audit opinions with respect to our fiscal 2002 and 2001 financial
statements. One of these actions was dismissed without prejudice
during June 2003. As to the other three actions, our Board of
Directors appointed a special litigation committee of independent directors to
evaluate the claims. The special committee determined that the
maintenance of the derivative proceedings against the individual defendants was
not in our best interests. Accordingly, during December 2003, we moved to
dismiss those claims. During March 2004, our motions were
granted, and the derivative claims were dismissed with prejudice as to all
defendants except Ernst & Young. We were substituted as the plaintiff in the
action and are now pursuing in our own name the claims against Ernst &
Young. The dates of the arbitration case management have been scheduled
including commencement of the hearing on April 20, 2009.
The Insurance Coverage Action.
On February 9, 2004, ClearOne and Edward Dallin Bagley (“Bagley”), a
former director and significant shareholder of ClearOne, jointly filed an action
in the United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division,
against National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
(“National Union”) and Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company (“Lumbermens
Mutual”), the carriers of certain prior period directors and officers’ liability
insurance policies, to recover the costs of defending and resolving claims
against certain of our present and former directors and officers in connection
with the SEC complaint filed on January 15, 2003, the shareholders’ class action
filed on June 30, 2003, and the shareholder derivative actions described above,
and seeking other damages resulting from the refusal of such carriers to timely
pay the amounts owing under such liability insurance policies. This
action has been consolidated into a declaratory relief action filed by one of
the insurance carriers on February 6, 2004 against ClearOne and certain of
its current and former directors. In this action, the insurers assert
that they are entitled to rescind insurance coverage under our directors and
officers’ liability insurance policies, $3.0 million of which was provided by
National Union and $2.0 million which was provided by Lumbermens Mutual, based
on alleged misstatements in our insurance applications. In February
2005, we entered into a confidential settlement agreement with Lumbermens Mutual
pursuant to which ClearOne and Bagley received a lump-sum cash amount and the
plaintiffs agreed to dismiss their claims against Lumbermens Mutual with
prejudice. The cash settlement is being held in a segregated account
until the claims involving National Union have been resolved, at which time the
amounts received in the action will be allocated between the Company and
Bagley. The amount distributed to us and Bagley will be determined
based on future negotiations between us and Bagley. We cannot
currently estimate the amount of the settlement which it will ultimately
receive. Upon determining the amount of the settlement which we will
ultimately receive, we will record this as a contingent gain. During
October 2005, the court granted summary judgment in favor of National Union on
its rescission defense and accordingly entered a judgment dismissing all of the
claims asserted by ClearOne and Mr. Bagley. In connection with the
summary judgment, we have been ordered to pay approximately $59,000 in
costs. However, due to the Lumbermens Mutual cash proceeds discussed
above and the appeal of the summary judgment ruling discussed below, this
potential liability has not been recorded in the balance sheet as of June 30,
2008. On February 2, 2006, we and Mr. Bagley appealed the summary
judgment ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, and on July
25, 2007, the Tenth Circuit issued its decision reversing the summary judgment
as to ClearOne’s claims but affirming it as to Bagley’s claims. The
case has been remanded back to the district court for trial on ClearOne’s claims
for breach of contract and for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and
fair dealing and on National Union’s defenses, including its rescission
defense. No assurances can be given that we will prevail at
trial. We and Bagley have entered into a Joint Prosecution and
Defense Agreement in connection with the action under which we are obligated to
pay all litigation expenses in the case except those which are solely related to
Bagley’s claims. (See “Item 13. Certain Relationships and
Related Transactions”).
These
litigations are subject to all of the risks and uncertainties of litigation and
there can be no assurance as to the probable result of the
litigations.
No matter
was submitted to a vote of security holders through the solicitation of proxies
or otherwise during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this
report.
Market
Information
Our
common stock has been traded on the Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol CLRO
since August 14, 2007. Prior to that time, our common stock was
quoted on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board. The over-the-counter
market quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up,
mark-down, or commission and may not necessarily represent actual
transactions. The following table sets forth high and low sale prices
(or high and low bid quotations) of our common stock for each fiscal quarter
indicated as reported on the applicable exchange or market.
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
$ |
7.25 |
|
|
$ |
4.40 |
|
|
$ |
3.75 |
|
|
$ |
3.00 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
|
7.42 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
4.34 |
|
|
|
3.20 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
|
5.81 |
|
|
|
4.50 |
|
|
|
6.69 |
|
|
|
4.05 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
|
5.07 |
|
|
|
3.66 |
|
|
|
6.58 |
|
|
|
4.57 |
|
On
September 9, 2008, the closing price for our common stock as reported on the
Nasdaq Capital Market was $4.74.
Shareholders
As of
September 9, 2008, there were 10,230,968 shares of our common stock issued and
outstanding and held by approximately 500 shareholders of record. This number
includes each broker dealer and clearing corporation, that hold shares for
customers, as a single shareholder.
Dividends
We have
not paid a cash dividend on our common stock and do not anticipate doing so in
the foreseeable future. We intend to retain earnings to fund future working
capital requirements, infrastructure needs, growth, product development, and our
stock repurchase program.
Securities
Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans
We
currently have two equity compensation plans, our 1998 Stock Option Plan (the
“1998 Plan”) and our 2007 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2007 Plan”).
The
following table sets forth information as of June 30, 2008 with respect to
compensation plans under which equity securities of ClearOne are authorized for
issuance.
|
Number of securities to be issued upon exercise of
outstanding options, warrants, and rights
|
Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding
options, warrants and rights
|
Number of securities remaining available for
future issuance under equity compensation plans
|
Equity
compensation
|
|
|
|
plans
approved by
|
|
|
|
security
holders
|
1,199,046
|
$5.85
|
996,000
|
Equity
compensation
|
|
|
|
plans
not approved by
|
|
|
|
security
holders
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total
|
1,199,046
|
$5.85
|
996,000
|
Issuer Purchases of Equity
Securities. The following table details purchases by ClearOne
of its own securities during the fourth fiscal quarter of 2008.
Period
|
|
Total
Number of Shares Purchased
|
|
|
Average
Price Paid per Share
|
|
|
Total
Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or
Programs
|
|
|
Maximum
Number (or Approximate Dollar Value) of Shares that may be Purchased Under
the Plans or Programs (1)
|
|
April
1, 2008 – April 30, 2008
|
|
|
42,915 |
|
|
$ |
4.80 |
|
|
|
42,915 |
|
|
$ |
1,056,105 |
|
May
1, 2008 – May 31, 2008
|
|
|
129,395 |
|
|
$ |
4.42 |
|
|
|
129,395 |
|
|
$ |
483,823 |
|
June
1, 2008 – June 30, 2008
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
$ |
4.15 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
$ |
276,573 |
|
Total
|
|
|
222,310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
222,310 |
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
On
August 30, 2007, we announced that our Board of Directors had approved a
stock repurchase program to purchase up $3,625,000 of our common stock
during the following 12 month period in open market and private block
transactions. On May 1, 2008 we announced that our Board of Directors
authorized the purchase of up to an additional $1 million of our common
stock. All repurchased shares will be immediately retired. The stock
repurchase program expired on August 30,
2008.
|
Employee Stock Purchase
Program. We have an Employee Stock Purchase Program
(“ESPP”). A total of 500,000 shares of common stock were reserved for
issuance under the ESPP. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008, 1,326
shares of common stock were issued under the ESPP and compensation expense was
approximately $7,000.
The
following selected financial data has been derived from our audited consolidated
financial statements for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005,
and 2004. The data in the table below has been adjusted to reflect discontinued
operations of a portion of our business services segment and our conferencing
services segment as held for sale. The information set forth below is not
necessarily indicative of results of future operations, and should be read in
conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations” and the consolidated financial statements and related
notes thereto included elsewhere in this report.
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share data)
|
|
Operating
results:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
39,752 |
|
|
$ |
39,861 |
|
|
$ |
35,362 |
|
|
$ |
29,087 |
|
|
$ |
25,736 |
|
Costs
and expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
|
16,461 |
|
|
|
17,723 |
|
|
|
17,375 |
|
|
|
12,720 |
|
|
|
14,760 |
|
Sales
& Marketing
|
|
|
6,673 |
|
|
|
7,791 |
|
|
|
7,866 |
|
|
|
9,070 |
|
|
|
8,497 |
|
Research
and product development
|
|
|
7,070 |
|
|
|
7,535 |
|
|
|
8,299 |
|
|
|
5,305 |
|
|
|
4,237 |
|
General
and administrative
|
|
|
7,669 |
|
|
|
3,091 |
|
|
|
5,108 |
|
|
|
5,489 |
|
|
|
6,767 |
|
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1,205 |
) |
|
|
(2,046 |
) |
|
|
4,080 |
|
Impairment
losses
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Restructuring
charge
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Operating
income (loss)
|
|
|
1,879 |
|
|
|
3,721 |
|
|
|
(2,081 |
) |
|
|
(1,741 |
) |
|
|
(12,605 |
) |
Other
income (expense), net
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
1,523 |
|
|
|
1,016 |
|
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
(261 |
) |
Income
(loss) from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
2,884 |
|
|
|
5,244 |
|
|
|
(1,065 |
) |
|
|
(1,423 |
) |
|
|
(12,866 |
) |
(Provision)
benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
2,756 |
|
|
|
(457 |
) |
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
3,370 |
|
|
|
964 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
5,640 |
|
|
|
4,787 |
|
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
1,947 |
|
|
|
(11,902 |
) |
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
2,155 |
|
|
|
14,128 |
|
|
|
2,015 |
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
5,656 |
|
|
$ |
5,209 |
|
|
$ |
2,095 |
|
|
$ |
16,075 |
|
|
$ |
(9,887 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings
(loss) per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
earnings (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
$ |
0.42 |
|
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
(1.08 |
) |
Diluted
earnings (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
0.52 |
|
|
$ |
0.41 |
|
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
|
$ |
(1.08 |
) |
Basic
earnings from discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
$ |
1.26 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
Diluted
earnings from discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
$ |
1.15 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
Basic
earnings (loss)
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
$ |
0.45 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
$ |
1.44 |
|
|
$ |
(0.89 |
) |
Diluted
earnings (loss)
|
|
$ |
0.52 |
|
|
$ |
0.45 |
|
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
1.30 |
|
|
$ |
(0.89 |
) |
Weighted
average shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
10,694,401 |
|
|
|
11,497,773 |
|
|
|
11,957,756 |
|
|
|
11,177,406 |
|
|
|
11,057,896 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
10,798,281 |
|
|
|
11,575,721 |
|
|
|
12,206,618 |
|
|
|
12,332,106 |
|
|
|
11,057,896 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of June 30,
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial
data:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets
|
|
$ |
28,885 |
|
|
$ |
38,317 |
|
|
$ |
39,743 |
|
|
$ |
34,879 |
|
|
$ |
27,202 |
|
Long-term
Securities
|
|
|
11,168 |
(1) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Total
assets
|
|
|
44,300 |
|
|
|
41,063 |
|
|
|
41,405 |
|
|
|
38,021 |
|
|
|
32,156 |
|
Long-term
debt, net of current maturities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
240 |
|
Capital
leases, net of current maturities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Total
shareholders' equity
|
|
|
32,140 |
|
|
|
30,438 |
|
|
|
30,412 |
|
|
|
24,911 |
|
|
|
9,006 |
|
(1)
During 2008 we reclassified approximately $11.2 million of auction rate
securities from a current to long-term asset on our balance sheet. We believe it
is probable that we will be able to collect all amounts due according to the
contractual terms of the investments.
Quarterly
Financial Data (Unaudited)
The
following table is a summary of unaudited quarterly financial information for
the years ended June 30, 2008, 2007 and 2006.
|
|
Fiscal 2008 Quarters Ended
|
|
|
|
Sept. 30
|
|
|
Dec. 31
|
|
|
Mar. 31
|
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(in thousands of dollars, except per share
data)
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
9,442 |
|
|
$ |
10,787 |
|
|
$ |
9,163 |
|
|
$ |
10,360 |
|
|
$ |
39,752 |
|
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
|
(4,299 |
) |
|
|
(4,414 |
) |
|
|
(3,439 |
) |
|
|
(4,309 |
) |
|
|
(16,461 |
) |
Sales
& Marketing
|
|
|
(1,601 |
) |
|
|
(1,578 |
) |
|
|
(1,640 |
) |
|
|
(1,855 |
) |
|
|
(6,674 |
) |
Research
and product development
|
|
|
(1,756 |
) |
|
|
(1,678 |
) |
|
|
(1,701 |
) |
|
|
(1,935 |
) |
|
|
(7,070 |
) |
General
and administrative
|
|
|
(2,895 |
) |
|
|
(1,198 |
) |
|
|
(1,183 |
) |
|
|
(2,393 |
) |
|
|
(7,669 |
) |
Other
income (expense), net
|
|
|
341 |
|
|
|
311 |
|
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(768 |
) |
|
|
2,230 |
|
|
|
1,396 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
2,884 |
|
Benefit
(provision) for income taxes
|
|
|
(171 |
) |
|
|
(449 |
) |
|
|
(335 |
) |
|
|
3,711 |
|
|
|
2,756 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
(939 |
) |
|
|
1,781 |
|
|
|
1,061 |
|
|
|
3,737 |
|
|
|
5,640 |
|
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
(924 |
) |
|
$ |
1,782 |
|
|
$ |
1,061 |
|
|
$ |
3,737 |
|
|
$ |
5,656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
income (loss) earnings per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
(0.09 |
) |
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
$ |
0.36 |
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
0.00 |
|
Basic
income (loss) earnings per common share
|
|
$ |
(0.08 |
) |
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
$ |
0.36 |
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
Diluted
income (loss) earnings per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
(0.08 |
) |
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
$ |
0.36 |
|
|
$ |
0.52 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
0.00 |
|
Diluted
income (loss) earnings per common share
|
|
$ |
(0.08 |
) |
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
|
$ |
0.10 |
|
|
$ |
0.36 |
|
|
$ |
0.52 |
|
|
|
Fiscal 2007 Quarters Ended
|
|
|
|
Sept. 30
|
|
|
Dec. 31
|
|
|
Mar. 31
|
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(in thousands of dollars, except per share
data)
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
9,411 |
|
|
$ |
10,107 |
|
|
$ |
9,355 |
|
|
$ |
10,988 |
|
|
$ |
39,861 |
|
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
|
(4,316 |
) |
|
|
(4,860 |
) |
|
|
(4,190 |
) |
|
|
(4,357 |
) |
|
|
(17,723 |
) |
Sales
& Marketing
|
|
|
(1,918 |
) |
|
|
(1,789 |
) |
|
|
(2,004 |
) |
|
|
(2,080 |
) |
|
|
(7,791 |
) |
Research
and product development
|
|
|
(2,079 |
) |
|
|
(1,855 |
) |
|
|
(1,848 |
) |
|
|
(1,753 |
) |
|
|
(7,535 |
) |
General
and administrative
|
|
|
(809 |
) |
|
|
(688 |
) |
|
|
(763 |
) |
|
|
(831 |
) |
|
|
(3,091 |
) |
Other
income (expense), net
|
|
|
332 |
|
|
|
320 |
|
|
|
577 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
1,523 |
|
Income
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
621 |
|
|
|
1,235 |
|
|
|
1,127 |
|
|
|
2,261 |
|
|
|
5,244 |
|
Benefit
(provision) for income taxes
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
(155 |
) |
|
|
(167 |
) |
|
|
(154 |
) |
|
|
(457 |
) |
Income
from continuing operations
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
1,080 |
|
|
|
960 |
|
|
|
2,107 |
|
|
|
4,787 |
|
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
263 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
422 |
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
677 |
|
|
$ |
1,084 |
|
|
$ |
1,223 |
|
|
$ |
2,225 |
|
|
$ |
5,209 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
income earnings per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.19 |
|
|
$ |
0.42 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
0.02 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.04 |
|
Basic
income earnings per common share
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
|
$ |
0.20 |
|
|
$ |
0.45 |
|
Diluted
income earnings per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.19 |
|
|
$ |
0.41 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
0.02 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.04 |
|
Diluted
income earnings per common share
|
|
$ |
0.06 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
|
$ |
0.20 |
|
|
$ |
0.45 |
|
|
|
Fiscal 2006 Quarters Ended
|
|
|
|
Sept. 30
|
|
|
Dec. 31
|
|
|
Mar. 31
|
|
|
June 30
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(in thousands of dollars, except per share
data)
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
8,777 |
|
|
$ |
9,102 |
|
|
$ |
8,277 |
|
|
$ |
9,206 |
|
|
$ |
35,362 |
|
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
|
(4,013 |
) |
|
|
(4,470 |
) |
|
|
(4,253 |
) |
|
|
(4,639 |
) |
|
|
(17,375 |
) |
Sales
& Marketing
|
|
|
(1,812 |
) |
|
|
(1,810 |
) |
|
|
(1,920 |
) |
|
|
(2,324 |
) |
|
|
(7,866 |
) |
Research
and product development
|
|
|
(1,799 |
) |
|
|
(1,778 |
) |
|
|
(2,201 |
) |
|
|
(2,521 |
) |
|
|
(8,299 |
) |
General
and administrative
|
|
|
(1,771 |
) |
|
|
(1,457 |
) |
|
|
(1,060 |
) |
|
|
(820 |
) |
|
|
(5,108 |
) |
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
|
|
1,205 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,205 |
|
Other
income (expense), net
|
|
|
166 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
237 |
|
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
1,016 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
753 |
|
|
|
(222 |
) |
|
|
(920 |
) |
|
|
(676 |
) |
|
|
(1,065 |
) |
Benefit
(provision) for income taxes
|
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
146 |
|
|
|
782 |
|
|
|
(145 |
) |
|
|
1,005 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
|
(76 |
) |
|
|
(138 |
) |
|
|
(821 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
1,012 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
677 |
|
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
2,155 |
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
1,987 |
|
|
$ |
81 |
|
|
$ |
540 |
|
|
$ |
(512 |
) |
|
$ |
2,096 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
income (loss) earnings per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.07 |
) |
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
0.08 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.06 |
|
|
|
0.03 |
|
|
|
0.18 |
|
Basic
income (loss) earnings per common share
|
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
Diluted
income (loss) earnings per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.07 |
) |
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
0.08 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
0.06 |
|
|
|
0.03 |
|
|
|
0.18 |
|
Diluted
income (loss) earnings per common share
|
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
(0.04 |
) |
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
The
following discussion should be read in conjunction with our consolidated
financial statements and related notes included in this report. This discussion
contains forward-looking statements based on current expectations that involve
risks and uncertainties, such as our plans, objectives, expectations, and
intentions, as set forth under “Disclosure Regarding Forward-Looking
Statements.” Our actual results and the timing of events could differ materially
from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of
various factors, including those set forth in the following discussion and under
the caption “Risk Factors” in Item 1A and elsewhere in this report. Unless
otherwise indicated, all references to a year reflect our fiscal year that ends
on June 30.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES
Our
discussion and analysis of our results of operations and financial position are
based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in
conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. We review the
accounting policies used in reporting our financial results on a regular basis.
The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial
statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the
reporting period. We evaluate our assumptions and estimates on an ongoing basis
and may employ outside experts to assist in our evaluations. We believe that the
estimates we use are reasonable; however, actual results could differ from those
estimates. Our significant accounting policies are described in Note 2 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in this report. We believe
the following critical accounting policies identify our most critical accounting
policies, which are the policies that are both important to the representation
of the registrant’s financial condition and results and requires our most
difficult, subjective or complex judgments, often as a result of the need to
make estimates about the effect of matters that are inherently
uncertain..
Revenue
and Associated Allowances for Revenue Adjustments and Doubtful
Accounts
Included
in continuing operations is product revenue, primarily from product sales to
distributors, dealers, and end-users. Product revenue is recognized when (i) the
products are shipped and any right of return expires, (ii) persuasive evidence
of an arrangement exists, (iii) the price is fixed and determinable, and (iv)
collection is reasonably assured.
We
provide a right of return on product sales to distributors. Accordingly, revenue
from product sales to distributors is not recognized until the return privilege
has expired, which approximates when product is sold-through to customers of the
Company’s distributors (dealers, system integrators, value-added resellers, and
end-users) rather than when the product is initially shipped to a distributor.
We evaluate, at each quarter-end, the inventory in the channel through
information provided by certain of our distributors. The level of inventory in
the channel will fluctuate up or down, each quarter, based upon our
distributors’ individual operations. Accordingly, each quarter-end revenue
deferral is calculated and recorded based upon the underlying, estimated channel
inventory at quarter-end. Although certain distributors provide certain channel
inventory amounts, we make judgments and estimates with regard to the amount of
inventory in the entire channel, for all customers and for all channel
inventory items, and the appropriate revenue and cost of goods
sold associated with those channel products. Although
these assumptions and judgments regarding total channel inventory revenue
and cost of goods sold could differ from actual amounts, we believe
that our calculations are indicative of actual levels of inventory in the
distribution channel. The amounts of deferred cost of goods sold were
included in consigned inventory. The following table details the amount of
deferred revenue, cost of goods sold, and gross profit at each quarter end for
the 24-month period ended June 30, 2008 (in thousands).
We offer
rebates and market development funds to certain of our distributors,
dealers/resellers, and end-users based upon volume of product purchased by them.
We record rebates as a reduction of revenue in accordance with Emerging Issues
Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 00-22, “Accounting for Points and Certain Other
Time-Based or Volume-Based Sales Incentive Offers, and Offers for Free Products
or Services to Be Delivered in the Future.”
We offer
credit terms on the sale of our products to a majority of our customers and
perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers’ financial condition. We
maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from
the inability or unwillingness of our customers to make required payments based
upon our historical collection experience and expected collectability of all
accounts receivable. Our actual bad debts in future periods may differ from our
current estimates and the differences may be material, which may have an adverse
impact on our future accounts receivable and cash position.
Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets
We assess
the impairment of long-lived assets, such as property and equipment and
definite-lived intangibles subject to amortization, annually or whenever events
or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of an asset may not
be recoverable. Recoverability of assets to be held and used is measured by a
comparison of the carrying amount of an asset or asset group to estimated future
undiscounted net cash flows of the related asset or group of assets over their
remaining lives. If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its estimated future
undiscounted cash flows, an impairment charge is recognized for the amount by
which the carrying amount exceeds the estimated fair value of the asset.
Impairment of long-lived assets is assessed at the lowest levels for which there
are identifiable cash flows that are independent of other groups of assets. The
impairment of long-lived assets requires judgments and estimates. If
circumstances change, such estimates could also change. Assets held for sale are
reported at the lower of the carrying amount or fair value, less the estimated
costs to sell.
Accounting
for Income Taxes
We are
subject to income taxes in both the United States and in certain non-U.S.
jurisdictions. We estimate our current tax position together with our future tax
consequences attributable to temporary differences resulting from differing
treatment of items, such as deferred revenue, depreciation, and other reserves
for tax and accounting purposes. These temporary differences result in deferred
tax assets and liabilities. We must then assess the likelihood that our deferred
tax assets will be recovered from future taxable income, prior year carryback,
or future reversals of existing taxable temporary differences. To the extent we
believe that recovery is not more likely than not, we establish a valuation
allowance against these deferred tax assets. Significant judgment is required in
determining our provision for income taxes, our deferred tax assets and
liabilities, and any valuation allowance recorded against our deferred tax
assets. To the extent we establish a valuation allowance in a period, we must
include and expense the allowance within the tax provision in the consolidated
statement of operations. In accordance with SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes,
we analyzed our valuation allowance at June 30, 2008 and determined that based
upon available evidence it is more likely than not that all of our deferred tax
assets will be realized and as such reversed our previously established
valuation allowance. The reversal of a previously established valuation
allowance results in a benefit for income taxes. See Note 17 in the notes to
financial statements for additional information.
Lower-of-Cost
or Market Adjustments and Reserves for Excess and Obsolete
Inventory
We
account for our inventory on a first-in, first-out basis, and make appropriate
adjustments on a quarterly basis to write-down the value of inventory to the
lower-of-cost or market.
In order
to determine what, if any, inventory needs to be written down, we perform a
quarterly analysis of obsolete and slow-moving inventory. In general, we
write-down our excess and obsolete inventory by an amount that is equal to the
difference between the cost of the inventory and its estimated market value if
market value is less than cost, based upon assumptions about future product
life-cycles, product demand, and market conditions. Those items that are found
to have a supply in excess of our estimated demand are considered to be
slow-moving or obsolete and the appropriate reserve is made to write-down the
value of that inventory to its realizable value. These charges are recorded in
cost of goods sold. At the point of the loss recognition, a new, lower-cost
basis for that inventory is established and subsequent changes in facts and
circumstances do not result in the restoration or increase in that newly
established cost basis. If there were to be a sudden and significant decrease in
demand for our products, or if there were a higher incidence of inventory
obsolescence because of rapidly changing technology and customer requirements,
we could be required to increase our inventory allowances, and our gross profit
could be adversely affected.
Share-Based
Payment
Prior to
June 30, 2005 and as permitted under the original SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation,” we accounted for our share-based payments following
the recognition and measurement principles of Accounting Principles Board
Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” as interpreted.
Accordingly, no share-based compensation expense had been reflected in our
statements of operations for unmodified option grants since (1) the exercise
price equaled the market value of the underlying common stock on the grant date
and (2) the related number of shares to be granted upon exercise of the stock
option was fixed on the grant date.
In
December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R, “Share-Based Payment.” SFAS No.
123R is a revision of SFAS No. 123. SFAS No. 123R establishes
standards for the accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its
equity instruments for goods or services. Primarily, SFAS No. 123R focuses on
accounting for transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in
share-based payment transactions. It also addresses transactions in which an
entity incurs liabilities in exchange for goods or services that are based on
the fair value of the entity’s equity instruments or that may be settled by the
issuance of those equity instruments.
Under
SFAS No. 123R, we measure the cost of employee services received in exchange for
an award of equity instruments based on the grant date fair value of the award
(with limited exceptions). That cost will be recognized over the period during
which an employee is required to provide service in exchange for the awards –
the requisite service period (usually the vesting period). No compensation cost
is recognized for equity instruments for which employees do not render the
requisite service. Therefore, if an employee does not ultimately render the
requisite service, the costs associated with the unvested options will not be
recognized cumulatively.
Effective
July 1, 2005, we adopted SFAS No. 123R and its fair value recognition provisions
using the modified prospective transition method. Under this transition method,
stock-based compensation cost recognized after July 1, 2005 includes the
straight-line basis compensation cost for (a) all share-based payments granted
prior to July 1, 2005, but not yet vested, based on the grant date fair values
used for the pro-forma disclosures under the original SFAS No. 123 and (b) all
share-based payments granted or modified on or after July 1, 2005, in accordance
with the provisions of SFAS No. 123R.
Under
SFAS No. 123R, we recognize compensation cost net of an anticipated forfeiture
rate and recognize the associated compensation cost for those awards expected to
vest on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period. We use judgment
in determining the fair value of the share-based payments on the date of grant
using an option-pricing model with assumptions regarding a number of highly
complex and subjective variables. These variables include, but are not limited
to, the risk-free interest rate of the awards, the expected life of the awards,
the expected volatility over the term of the awards, the expected dividends of
the awards, and an estimate of the amount of awards that are expected to be
forfeited. If assumptions change in the application of SFAS No. 123R in future
periods, the stock-based compensation cost ultimately recorded under SFAS No.
123R may differ significantly from what was recorded in the current
period.
DISCUSSION
OF OPERATIONS
Results
of Operations
The
following table sets forth certain items from our consolidated statements of
operations for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2008, 2007, and 2006, together
with the percentage of total revenue which each such item
represents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
39,752 |
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
|
$ |
39,861 |
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
|
$ |
35,362 |
|
|
|
100.0% |
|
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
|
16,461 |
|
|
|
41.4% |
|
|
|
17,723 |
|
|
|
44.5% |
|
|
|
17,375 |
|
|
|
49.1% |
|
Gross
profit
|
|
|
23,291 |
|
|
|
58.6% |
|
|
|
22,138 |
|
|
|
55.5% |
|
|
|
17,987 |
|
|
|
50.9% |
|
Operating
expenses (benefit):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
& Marketing
|
|
|
6,673 |
|
|
|
16.8% |
|
|
|
7,791 |
|
|
|
19.5% |
|
|
|
7,866 |
|
|
|
22.2% |
|
Research
and product development
|
|
|
7,070 |
|
|
|
17.8% |
|
|
|
7,535 |
|
|
|
18.9% |
|
|
|
8,299 |
|
|
|
23.5% |
|
General
and administrative
|
|
|
7,669 |
|
|
|
19.3% |
|
|
|
3,091 |
|
|
|
7.8% |
|
|
|
5,108 |
|
|
|
14.4% |
|
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
|
(1,205 |
) |
|
|
-3.4% |
|
Total
operating expenses
|
|
|
21,412 |
|
|
|
53.9% |
|
|
|
18,417 |
|
|
|
46.2% |
|
|
|
20,068 |
|
|
|
56.8% |
|
Operating
income (loss)
|
|
|
1,879 |
|
|
|
4.7% |
|
|
|
3,721 |
|
|
|
9.3% |
|
|
|
(2,081 |
) |
|
|
-5.9% |
|
Other
income, net
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
2.5% |
|
|
|
1,523 |
|
|
|
3.8% |
|
|
|
1,016 |
|
|
|
2.9% |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
2,884 |
|
|
|
7.3% |
|
|
|
5,244 |
|
|
|
13.2% |
|
|
|
(1,065 |
) |
|
|
-3.0% |
|
Benefit
from (Provision) for income taxes
|
|
|
2,756 |
|
|
|
6.9% |
|
|
|
(457 |
) |
|
|
-1.1% |
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
2.8% |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
5,640 |
|
|
|
14.2% |
|
|
|
4,787 |
|
|
|
12.0% |
|
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
-0.2% |
|
Income
from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
0.0% |
|
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
1.1% |
|
|
|
2,156 |
|
|
|
6.1% |
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
5,656 |
|
|
|
14.2% |
|
|
$ |
5,209 |
|
|
|
13.1% |
|
|
$ |
2,096 |
|
|
|
5.9% |
|
The
following is a discussion of our results of operations for our fiscal years
ended June 30, 2008, 2007, and 2006. All items are discussed on a consolidated
basis.
Revenue
Our
revenues were $39.8 million for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008 (“2008”)
compared to revenues of $39.9 million and $35.4 million for the fiscal years
ended June 30, 2007 (“2007”) and June 30, 2006 (“2006”),
respectively.
2008
revenues decreased $100,000 or less than one percent from 2007 and increased
$4.4 million or 12 percent over 2006. The slight decrease in revenue in 2008
from 2007 was due primarily to declines in our premium, tabletop, conferencing
furniture and conferencing accessories products which collectively decreased
approximately $1.2 million partially offset by a collective increase of
approximately $900,000 in our professional and personal conferencing
products.
The $4.4
million 2008 revenue increase over 2006 was due to continued growth in our
professional conferencing products which increased approximately $4.7 million in
2008 over 2006. We also realized growth in our tabletop and personal
conferencing products which collectively increased about $600,000 in 2008 from
2006. These increases were partially offset by declines in our premium
conferencing and conferencing furniture products which collectively decreased by
about $800,000.
We
evaluate, at each quarter-end, the inventory in the channel through information
provided by certain of our distributors. The level of inventory in the
channel will fluctuate up or down, each quarter, based upon our distributors’
individual operations. Accordingly, each quarter-end revenue deferral is
calculated and recorded based upon the underlying, estimated channel inventory
at quarter-end. During the fiscal years ended June 30, 2008 and 2007, the
net change in deferred revenue based on the net movement of inventory in the
channel was a net recognition of $325,000 and $1.0 million in revenue,
respectively.
Revenue
from sales outside of the United States as a percent of total revenue was 30
percent for 2008, 29 percent for 2007 and 28 percent for 2006.
Costs
of Goods Sold and Gross Profit
Costs of
goods sold (“COGS”) includes expenses associated with finished goods purchased
from outsourced manufacturers, the manufacture of our products, including
material and direct labor, our manufacturing and operations organization,
property and equipment depreciation, warranty expense, freight expense, royalty
payments, and the allocation of overhead expenses.
The
following table sets forth our COGS and gross profit together with each item’s
amount as a percentage of total revenue:
|
|
Year
Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(in
thousands of dollars)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
of Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
of Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
of Revenue
|
|
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
$ |
16,461 |
|
|
|
41.40% |
|
|
$ |
17,723 |
|
|
|
44.50% |
|
|
$ |
17,375 |
|
|
|
49.10% |
|
Gross
profit
|
|
$ |
23,291 |
|
|
|
58.60% |
|
|
$ |
22,138 |
|
|
|
55.50% |
|
|
$ |
17,987 |
|
|
|
50.90% |
|
Our 2008
gross profit was $23.3 million compared to $22.1 million in 2007 and $18.0
million in 2006. Gross profit margins (“GPM’s”), gross profit as a percentage of
sales, were 58.6, 55.5 and 50.9 percent in 2008, 2007 and 2006,
respectively.
Despite
the $100,000 revenue decrease in 2008 from 2007, we achieved a $1.2
million increase in gross profit and 3.1 percent GPM increase over the same
period due primarily to the 2008 mix and magnitude of higher margin products,
selective channel price increases in effect for all of 2008 and lower costs on
several of our products realized from a combination of new product designs
optimized for, among other things, lower manufacturing costs in addition to
negotiating lower prices with certain of our outsourced manufacturing partners.
2008 gross profit was $5.3 million higher and GPM increased 7.7 percent over
2006 due to a 2008 mix of higher margin products, a significant decrease in
inventory cost variances and product write-off’s from 2006 and the selective
price increases and lower product costs discussed above.
Operating
Expenses and Profits (Losses)
Operating
profits (losses), or income from operations, is the surplus after operating
expenses are deducted from gross profits. Operating expenses include sales &
marketing (“S&M”) expenses, research and development (“R&D”) expenses
and general and administrative (“G&A”) expenses. Total operating expenses
were $21.4 million in 2008 compared to $18.4 million in 2007 and $20.1 million
in 2006. The following is a more detailed discussion of expenses related to
sales and marketing, research and product development, general and
administrative, and settlement in shareholders’ class action.
Sales and
Marketing.
S&M expenses include selling, customer service, and marketing expenses such
as employee-related costs, allocations of overhead expenses, trade shows, and
other advertising and selling expenses. Total S&M expenses were $6.7 million
in 2008 compared to $7.8 million in 2007 and $7.9 million in 2006. As a
percentage of revenues, S&M expenses were 16.8 percent in 2008 compared to
19.5 percent in 2007 and 22.2 percent in 2006. 2008 S&M expenses were about
$1.1 million or 14 percent lower than 2007 due primarily to lower labor and
related expenses which demonstrated our ability to leverage existing S&M
resources to generate a solid revenue result. 2008 S&M expenses were
approximately $1.2 million lower than 2006 also due to a decrease of
approximately $1.4 million of labor and related expenses partially offset by
higher marketing related expenses.
Research
and Development. R&D
expenses include research and development, product line management, engineering
services, and test and application expenses, including employee-related costs,
outside services, expensed materials, depreciation, and an allocation of
overhead expenses. Total R&D expenses were $7.1 million in 2008 compared to
$7.5 million in 2007 and $8.3 million in 2006. As a percentage of revenues,
R&D expenses were 17.8 percent in 2008 compared to 18.9 percent in 2007 and
23.5 percent in 2006. 2008 R&D expenses decreased approximately $500,000
from 2007 due to lower project specific R&D costs, primarily related to our
early fiscal 2008 completion and launch of our Converge Pro line of professional
conferencing products. The 2008 decrease in R&D expenses of $1.2 million
from 2006 was due to lower labor and related expenses and outside engineering
expenses of approximately $900,000 in addition to lower R&D project specific
expenses of about $400,000 each of which were related to ongoing R&D efforts
including bringing our the majority of our products into compliance with
environmental directives.
General
and Administrative G&A expenses include employee-related costs,
professional service fees, allocations of overhead expenses, litigation costs
and corporate administrative costs, including finance and human resources. Total
G&A expenses were $7.7 million in 2008 compared to $3.1 million in 2007 and
$5.1 million in 2006. As a percentage of revenues, G&A expenses were 19.3
percent in 2008, 7.8 percent in 2007 and 14.4 percent in 2006. The
significant $4.6 million increase in 2008 G&A expenses from 2007 was due
primarily to estimating and establishing a $3.3 million accrual for a contingent
liability. The Company’s legal fees also increased approximately $1 million in
2008 from 2007 primarily associated with its theft of intellectual property and
copyright complaints against WideBand Solutions, Inc. et al. (please refer to
Item 3 “Legal Proceedings” in Part I of this Form 10-K for additional
information on these legal proceedings). 2008 G&A expenses were about $2.6
million higher than 2006 due primarily to the $3.3 million accrual for a
contingent liability and $1 million in legal fees discussed above, partially
offset by lower payroll and related expenses of about $400,000 associated with
lower G&A headcount, lower depreciation of about $250,000 and lower audit
and related fees of $1.3 million required in much of 2006 to bring the Company’s
financial statements current.
Settlement
in shareholders’ class action expense (benefit). During June 2003,
a consolidated complaint was filed against ClearOne, eight of our present or
former officers and directors, and our former auditor, Ernst & Young, by a
class consisting of purchasers of the Company’s common stock during the period
from April 17, 2001 through January 15, 2003. On December 4, 2003, we, on behalf
of the Company and all other defendants with the exception of Ernst & Young,
entered into a settlement agreement with the class pursuant to which we agreed
to pay the class $5.0 million and issue the class 1.2 million shares of our
common stock. The cash payment was made in two equal installments, the first on
November 10, 2003 and the second on January 14, 2005. On May 23,
2005, the court order was amended to provide that odd-lot numbers of shares (99
or fewer shares) would not be issued from the settlement fund and claimants who
would otherwise be entitled to receive 99 or fewer shares would be paid cash in
lieu of such odd-lot numbers of shares. On September 29, 2005, we completed our
obligations under the settlement agreement by issuing a total of 1,148,494
shares of our common stock to the plaintiff class, including 228,000 shares
previously issued in November 2004, and paying an aggregate of $126,705 in cash
in lieu of shares to those members of the class who would otherwise have been
entitled to receive an odd-lot number of shares or who resided in states in
which there was no exemption available for the issuance of shares. The cash
payments were calculated on the basis of $2.46 per share which was equal to the
higher of (i) the closing price for our common stock as quoted by the Pink
Sheets on the business day prior to the date the shares were mailed or (ii) the
average closing price over the five trading days prior to such mailing
date.
During
fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2005 we realized a (benefit) from this settlement in the
amount of ($1.2 million) and ($2.1 million), respectively as a result of the
quarterly mark-to-market of the liability associated with the 1.2 million shares
of common stock that were issued in November 2004 (fiscal 2005) and September
2005 (fiscal 2006) to class members and their legal counsel as part of the
December 2003 (fiscal 2004) settlement agreement. This mark-to-market adjustment
of the stock to reflect the liability associated with the 1.2 million shares was
based upon the closing price of our common stock at the end of each quarter
through the date the shares were issued on September 29,
2005. Accordingly, the expense (benefit) associated with these stock
price fluctuations is no longer recognized.
Other operating income, net.
Other income, net, includes our interest income, interest expense, capital
gains, gain (loss) on the disposal of assets, and currency gain (loss). Other
income was $1.0 million in 2008 compared to $1.5 million in 2007 and $1.0
million in 2006. The $500,000 decrease in 2008 from 2007 was due primarily to
the Company’s 2007 receipt of approximately $300,000 in interest which
accompanied a $3.1 million IRS refund payment in addition to lower interest
income associated lower interest rates in the Company’s investments and lower
cash and marketable securities balances as the Company used $4.3 million of its
cash during 2008 to repurchase its common stock. Other operating income was
about the same in both 2008 and 2006.
(Provision for) Benefit from income
taxes. The Company’s benefit for income taxes from continuing operations
was $2.8 million in 2008 compared to a provision of about ($457,000) in 2007 and
a benefit of $1.0 million in 2006 The $2.8 million benefit in 2008 was due
primarily to the reversal of the Company’s valuation allowance during the fiscal
fourth quarter that the Company had recorded against its deferred tax
assets. Given the company’s past history of losses from
continuing operations, prior to its fiscal 2007, a valuation allowance was
recorded against all of the Company’s deferred tax assets. The valuation
allowance was initially established, in accordance with SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes,
because it was not considered more likely than not that the deferred tax assets
would be realized. However, as a result of our analysis and in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles, the previously established valuation
allowance of approximately $4.1 million was reversed. The Company’s income taxes
were negatively impacted in 2008 by its adoption of FIN 48 Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes in addition to its recognition of tax on the undistributed earnings
of the Company’s foreign subsidiaries which together added approximately
$541,000 to the Company’s 2008 income tax expense.
In 2007
the Company recorded a ($457,000) income tax provision. Due to the Company’s
2007 profitability, it was able to begin taking advantage of R&D tax credits
and state operating loss deductions resulting in a relatively low, 9 percent
effective income tax rate on 2007 income from continuing
operations. The Company realized a tax benefit in 2006 due to its
losses from continuing operations.
Income from discontinued operations,
net of tax. Income from discontinued operations, net of tax, includes the
gain on the sale of our conferencing services business and the funds from the
Indemnity Escrow account from Premiere related to the sale of our conferencing
services business which was sold on July 1, 2004; income from discontinued
operations related to our Canadian audiovisual integration business (“OM
Video”); the gain on the March 4, 2005 sale of OM Video; payments on our note
receivable related to the sale of OM Video; payments on our note receivable
related to the sale to Burk; and income from discontinued operations to our
Document and Educational Camera business sold to Ken-A-Vision Manufacturing
Company, Inc. (“KAV”) on August 23, 2006. Accordingly, the results of operations
and the financial position have been reclassified in the accompanying condensed
consolidated financial statements as discontinued operations. The total income
from discontinued operations, net of tax, was $16,000 for 2008 compared to
$422,000 for 2007 and $2.2 million in 2006. Summary operating results of the
discontinued operations are set forth below (in thousands of
dollars).
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
income from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conferencing
services business
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
729 |
|
OM
Video
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
248 |
|
Burk
Technology
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
953 |
|
Ken-A-Vision
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
Total
income from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
422 |
|
|
$ |
2,156 |
|
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
As of
June 30, 2008, our cash and cash equivalents were approximately $3.3 million and
our marketable securities were approximately $17.1 million, which represented an
overall decrease of $2.2 million in our balances from June 30, 2007 which had
cash and cash equivalents of approximately $2.8 million and marketable
securities of approximately $19.9 million. We had an overall decrease of
approximately $1.4 million from our balances at June 30, 2006, which had cash
and cash equivalents of approximately $1.2 million and marketable securities
totaling $20.6 million.
Net cash
flows provided by operating activities were $3.5 million in 2008 compared to
$6.8 million in 2007 and $2.2 million in 2006. 2008 net cash provided by
operating activities was lower than 2007 by $3.3 million primarily due to the
Company’s reversal of its previously established valuation allowance recorded
against deferred tax assets which resulted in a ($4.5 million) non-cash
adjustment in its statement of cash flows and $524,000 decrease in inventory
write-off’s partially offset by the $853,000 increase in net income and $874,000
increase in changes in other operating assets and liabilities. The $1.3 million
increase in net cash provided by operating activities in 2008 over 2006 was due
to the $5.7 million increase in net income from continuing operations offset by
a $2.4 million decrease in changes in other operating assets and liabilities
which includes the ($4.5 million) deferred tax asset valuation allowance
reversal in addition to lower depreciation, stock-based compensation, inventory
write-offs and cash provided by discontinued operating activities which
collectively decreased approximately $2.3 million.
Net cash
flows provided by (used in) investing activities were $700,000 in 2008 compared
to $748,000 in 2007 and ($2.8 million) in 2006. The 2008 $48,000 decrease in net
cash provided by investing activities from 2007 was due primarily to $925,000
less cash provided by discontinued investing activities in 2008 from 2007
related to the Company’s sale of its educational camera product line in August
2006 and the sale of its stock of ClearOne Canada to OM Video. This decrease was
partially offset by a $838,000 increase in the sale of marketable securities,
net of purchases of marketable securities in 2008. 2008 net cash provided by
investing activities increased about $3.5 million from 2006 due primarily to
increased sales of marketable securities of $6.2 million, net of purchases of
marketable securities in 2008, partially offset by $1.9 million less cash
provided by discontinued operating activities and an increase of $560,000 in
cash used to purchase of property and equipment.
Net cash
(used in) provided by financing activities during 2008 totaled approximately
($3.7 million) compared to ($6.0 million) in 2007 and $0 in 2006. During 2008,
we repurchased 835,000 shares of our common stock for $4.3 million. Also during
2008 we received $800,000 and issued 228,000 of stock upon the exercise of
employee stock options. We received a $70,000 tax benefit from option exercises
in 2008. During 2007 we repurchased approximately 1.4 million shares of our
common stock for approximately $6.1 million. We did not have any net cash flows
(used in) financing activities in fiscal 2006.
Additionally,
in 2008 we paid approximately $1.7 million in income taxes and reduced our July
1, 2007 balance of retained earnings by $295,000 upon adoption of FASB issued
Interpretation No. 48 (“FIN 48”), “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes.”
During 2007, we recorded $1.1 million in non-cash financing activities related
to leasehold improvements to our headquarters, the majority of which was paid as
an incentive by the lessor as part of the lease agreement. These improvements
are being accounted for in accordance with FASB Technical Bulletin No. 88-1,
Issues Relating to Accounting
for Leases, which states among other things that landlord incentives
which fund leasehold improvements should be recorded as deferred rent and
amortized as reductions to lease expense over the term of the
lease.
We
believe that future income from operations and effective management of working
capital will provide the liquidity needed to finance growth plans. In addition
to capital expenditures, we may use cash during fiscal 2009 for selective
infusions of technological, marketing or product manufacturing rights to broaden
our product offerings; for continued share repurchases; and if available for a
reasonable price, acquisitions that may strategically fit our business and are
accretive to performance.
At June
30, 2008, we had open purchase orders related to our contract manufacturers and
other contractual obligations of approximately $6.2 million primarily related to
inventory purchases.
As of
June 30, 2008, we had approximately $12.3 million par value of auction rate
securities, less a temporary valuation adjustment of approximately $1.1 million
to reflect the current lack of liquidity of these investments. We recorded this
temporary valuation adjustment in other comprehensive income, net of the related
tax benefit of $413,000, which did not affect fiscal 2008 earnings, and
reclassified these investments to long-term investment securities to reflect the
lack of liquidity of these investments. Due to current market conditions, these
investments have experienced failed auctions beginning in mid-February 2008.
These failed auctions result in a lack of liquidity in the securities, but do
not affect the underlying collateral of the securities and we believe that given
their high credit quality, it will ultimately recover at par all amounts
invested in these securities. We do not anticipate that any potential lack of
liquidity in these auction rate securities will affect our ability to finance
our operations and growth plans.
On March
4, 2005, we sold all of the issued and outstanding stock of ClearOne Canada to
6351352 Canada Inc. ClearOne Canada owned all the issued and outstanding stock
of Stechyson Electronics, Ltd., which conducts business under the name OM Video.
For the first two quarters of fiscal 2006 and during all of fiscal 2005, we
received total payments, including interest, of $300,000 and $150,000,
respectively, on the note receivable. Through December 31, 2005, all payments
had been received and $854,000 of the promissory note remained outstanding;
however, 6351352 Canada Inc. failed to make any subsequent, required payments
under the note receivable until June 30, 2006 when it paid $50,000. We
reevaluated our options and concluded that our best course of action was to
enforce our security and appoint a receiver over the assets of OM Video. As of
June 30, 2008, the amount of the promissory note and contingent earn-out
provision was approximately $696,000 which is net of $632,000 collected through
receivership. We do not expect to collect any further amounts through the
receivership.
On April
12, 2001, we sold the assets of the remote control portion of our RFM/Broadcast
division to Burk for $750,000 in cash at closing, $1.8 million in the form of a
seven-year promissory note, with interest at the rate of 9.0 percent per year,
and up to $700,000 as a commission over a period of up to seven years. On August
22, 2005, we entered into a Mutual Release and Waiver Agreement with Burk
pursuant to which Burk paid us $1.3 million in full satisfaction of the
promissory note. We realized a pre-tax gain on the sale of $1.3
million for fiscal 2006, $187,000 for fiscal 2005, and $93,000 for fiscal
2004.
On July
1, 2004, we sold our conferencing services business segment to Premiere for
$21.3 million. Of the purchase price, $1.0 million was placed into an
18-month indemnity escrow account. We received the $1.0 million in the indemnity
escrow account in January 2006. We realized a pre-tax gain on the
sale of $1.0 million for fiscal 2006 and $17.4 million for fiscal
2005.
In August
2006, we sold our document and educational camera product line to Ken-A-Vision
Manufacturing Co. Inc., a privately held manufacturer of camera solutions for
education, audio visual, research, and manufacturing applications. Under the
terms of the transaction, Ken-A-Vision received the intellectual property rights
to ClearOne's camera technologies, as well as ownership of current inventory.
The sale price was $635,000, payable in cash and a $318,000 note receivable
payable over 24 months. We realized a pre-tax (loss) on the sale of ($9,000) for
fiscal 2007.
Beginning
in January 2003 and continuing through our fiscal 2006, we incurred significant
costs with respect to the defense and settlement of legal proceedings and the
audits of our consolidated financial statements. Restatement of fiscal 2002 and
fiscal 2001 consolidated financial statements and the fiscal 2004 and fiscal
2003 audits were significantly more complex, time consuming, and expensive than
we originally anticipated. The extended time commitment required to complete the
restatement of financial information was costly and diverted our resources, as
well as had a material effect on our results of operations. We paid $127,000 in
fiscal 2006, $2.5 million in fiscal 2005, and $2.5 million in fiscal 2004 in
cash to settle the shareholders’ class action lawsuit. We incurred legal fees in
the amount of approximately $1.9 million from January 2003 through June 2006 and
we have incurred audit and tax fees in the amount of approximately $3.7 million
from January 2004 through June 2006.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
We have
no off-balance-sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a
current or future material effect on our financial condition, changes in
financial conditions, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity,
capital expenditures or capital resources, results of operations or
liquidity.
Contractual
Obligations
Contractual
obligations related to our operating leases at June 30, 2008 are summarized
below (in thousands of dollars):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After
5 Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
Leases
|
|
$ |
4,408 |
|
|
$ |
701 |
|
|
$ |
1,396 |
|
|
$ |
1,345 |
|
|
$ |
965 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
Contractual
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
Obligations
|
|
$ |
4,408 |
|
|
$ |
701 |
|
|
$ |
1,396 |
|
|
$ |
1,345 |
|
|
$ |
965 |
|
ISSUED
BUT NOT YET ADOPTED ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements
(“SFAS No. 157”), which defines fair value, establishes guidelines for measuring
fair value and expands disclosure regarding fair value measurements. SFAS No.
157 does not require new fair value measurements but rather eliminates
inconsistencies in guidance found in various prior accounting pronouncements.
SFAS No. 157 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007, on a prospective basis. We do not
expect the adoption of SFAS No. 157 to have a material effect on our financial
statements.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 159 “The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities.” This statement permits entities to
choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair
value that are not currently required to be measured at fair
value. The objective is to improve financial reporting by providing
entities with the opportunity to mitigate volatility in reported earnings caused
by measuring related assets and liabilities differently without having to apply
complex hedge accounting provisions. This statement requires a
business entity to report unrealized gains and losses on items for which the
fair value option has been elected in earnings at each subsequent reporting
date. An entity may decide whether to elect the fair value option for
each eligible item on its election date, subject to certain requirements
described in the statement. SFAS 159 is effective for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007. We are currently reviewing the
requirements of SFAS 159 and, at this point in time, have not determined the
impact, if any, that this statement may have on our results of operations and
financial position.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R), “Business Combinations.” SFAS
141(R) requires all business combinations completed after the effective date to
be accounted for by applying the acquisition method (previously referred to as
the purchase method). Companies applying this method will have to
identify the acquirer, determine the acquisition date and purchase price and
recognize at their acquisition-date fair values the identifiable assets
acquired, liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interests in the
acquiree. In the case of a bargain purchase the acquirer is required
to reevaluate the measurements of the recognized assets and liabilities at the
acquisition date and recognize a gain on that date if an excess
remains. SFAS 141(R) becomes effective for fiscal periods beginning
after December 15, 2008. The Company is currently evaluating the
impact of SFAS 141(R).
Market
risk represents the risk of changes in the value of a financial instrument,
derivative or non-derivative, caused by fluctuations in interest rates, foreign
exchange rates, and equity prices. Changes in these factors could cause
fluctuations in the results of our operations and cash flows. In the
ordinary course of business, we are exposed to foreign currency and interest
rate risks. These risks primarily relate to the sale of products and services to
foreign customers and changes in interest rates on any interest-bearing
investments or notes receivable, notes payable, or capital leases.
Financial
instruments which potentially expose us to concentrations of credit risk
primarily consist of cash and cash equivalents, short-term and long-term
investments, accounts receivable and unbilled accounts receivable. We place our
temporary cash in liquid investments at highly-rated financial institutions.
However, the Company’s investment in auction-rate securities (“ARSs”) became
illiquid during 2008 which was in contradiction to certain representations of
the investment banks which hold certain of the Company’s cash and marketable
securities. As of June 30, 2008, the cost basis balance of our
long-term investments was $12.23 million which consisted exclusively of ARSs.
The Company’s ARSs are held at two different investment banks: USB and Morgan
Stanley. All but one of the ARS investments are AAA and/or Aaa rated. The other
ARS is A2/A rated. Recently, auctions for these securities were not successful,
resulting in the Company continuing to hold the securities and the issuers
paying interest at the maximum contractual rate. Based on current credit market
conditions, it is likely that future auctions related to these securities will
be unsuccessful in the near term. Unsuccessful auctions will result in the
Company holding securities beyond their next scheduled auction reset dates and
limiting the short-term liquidity of these investments. Due to the unsuccessful
auctions, at June 30, 2008, the Company determined there was a decline in the
fair value of its ARS investments of about $1.1 million, which, in accordance
with SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity
Securities, and related guidance issued by FASB and the SEC, was deemed
temporary and recognized as an unrealized loss in the other comprehensive income
section of the Company’s statement of operations. ClearOne believes
that the underlying securities or collateral have not been affected and any lack
of liquidity in its ARSs will not impact its ability to fund its
operations.
All of
the Company’s other investment securities, which are not ARSs, consist primarily
of shares in U.S., state and local government agency obligations that have a par
value of $1.00. These certificates have a rating of A or higher. Our
investment securities also consist of shares in triple-A rated short-term money
market funds that typically invest in U.S. Treasury, U.S. government agency, and
highly rated corporate securities. Since these funds are managed in a manner
designed to maintain a $1.00 per share market value, we do not expect any
material changes in market values, of our non-ARSs, as a result of increase or
decrease in interest rates.
We
believe that our credit policies reflect normal industry terms and business
risk. We do not anticipate non-performance by the counterparties and,
accordingly, do not require collateral. Credit losses and write-offs of accounts
receivable balances have historically not been material to our financial
statements and have not exceeded our expectations.
We did
not have any notes payable and capital lease obligations as of June 30, 2008.
Accordingly, we do not have significant exposure to changing interest rates. We
have not undertaken any additional actions to cover market interest rate market
risk and are not a party to any other interest rate market risk management
activities. We do not purchase or hold any derivative financial
instruments.
Although
our subsidiaries enter into transactions in currencies other than their
functional currency, foreign currency exposures arising from these transactions
are not material.
The
response to this item is submitted as a separate section of this Form 10-K
beginning on page F-1.
None.
We
maintain disclosure controls and procedures designed to ensure that information
required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended, is recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the
required time periods and that such information is accumulated and communicated
to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, as appropriate, to allow for timely decisions regarding required
disclosure. The effectiveness of any system of disclosure controls and
procedures is subject to certain limitations, including the exercise of judgment
in designing, implementing, and evaluating the controls and procedures, the
assumptions used in identifying the likelihood of future events, and the
inability to eliminate improper conduct completely. A control system, no matter
how well designed and operated, cannot provide absolute assurance that the
objectives of the controls system are met, and no evaluation of controls can
provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if
any, within a company have been detected. As a result, there can be no assurance
that our disclosure controls and procedures will detect all errors or
fraud.
As
required by Rule 13a-15 under the Exchange Act, we have completed an evaluation,
under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including
the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, of the
effectiveness and the design and operation of our disclosure controls and
procedures as of June 30, 2008. Based upon this evaluation our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and
procedures were effective as of June 30, 2008.
There has
been no change in our internal controls and procedures over financial reporting
(as defined in Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15 under the Exchange Act) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
controls and procedures over financial reporting during the fourth quarter ended
June 30, 2008, and there were no significant deficiencies or material
weaknesses.
None.
The
information required by this Item relating to our directors is incorporated
herein by reference to the definitive proxy statement for our 2008 Annual
Meeting of Shareholders
The
information required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the
definitive proxy statement for our 2008 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders.
The
information required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the
definitive proxy statement for our 2008 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders.
The
information required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the
definitive proxy statement for our 2008 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders.
The
information required by this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the
definitive proxy statement for our 2008 Annual Meeting of
Shareholders.
(a) 1. Financial
Statements
The
following financial statements are filed as part of this report in a separate
section of this Form 10-K beginning on page F-1.
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm – Jones Simkins, P.C.
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm – Hansen Barnett & Maxwell,
P.C.
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2008 and 2007
Consolidated
Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss) for fiscal years
ended
June 30,
2008, 2007, and 2006
Consolidated
Statements of Shareholders’ Equity for fiscal years ended June 30, 2008,
2007,
and
2006
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for fiscal years ended June 30, 2008, 2007, and
2006
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
2. Financial
Statement Schedules
All
schedules are omitted as the required information is inapplicable or the
information is presented in the accompanying consolidated financial statements
and notes thereto.
3. Exhibits
The
following documents are included as exhibits to this report.
Exhibit
|
|
|
No.
|
Title of Document
|
Location
|
|
Articles
of Incorporation and amendments thereto
|
This
filing
|
3.2
|
Bylaws
|
Incorp.
by reference1
|
10.1
|
Employment
Separation Agreement between ClearOne Communications,
Inc. and Frances Flood, dated December
5, 2003.*
|
Incorp.
by reference3
|
10.2
|
Employment
Separation Agreement between ClearOne Communications,
Inc. and Susie Strohm, dated December
5, 2003.*
|
Incorp.
by reference3
|
10.3
|
Joint
Prosecution and Defense Agreement dated April 1, 2004 between
ClearOne Communications, Inc. Parsons Behle & Latimer, Edward Dallin
Bagley and Burbidge & Mitchell, and amendment thereto
|
Incorp.
by reference3
|
10.4
|
1997
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
|
Incorp.
by reference7
|
10.5
|
1998
Stock Option Plan
|
Incorp.
by reference7
|
10.6
|
2007
Equity Incentive Plan
|
Incorp.
by reference10
|
10.7
|
Manufacturing
Agreement between ClearOne Communications, Inc. and Inovar, Inc. dated
August 1, 2005
|
Incorp.
by reference4
|
10.8
|
Office
Lease between Edgewater Corporate Park, LLC and ClearOne Communications,
Inc. dated June 5, 2006
|
Incorp.
by reference6
|
10.9
|
Consulting
Agreement between Edward D. Bagley and ClearOne Communications, Inc. dated
July 6, 2007
|
Incorp.
by reference8
|
10.10
|
Severance
Agreement between ClearOne Communications, Inc. and Edward D. Bagley dated
July 6, 2007*
|
Incorp.
by reference8
|
10.11
|
Compromise
Agreement between ClearOne Communications UK Limited and Martin Offwood
dated August 13, 2007*
|
Incorp.
by reference9
|
10.12
|
Warehouse
Lease Agreement between Woodenshoe Development and Clearone
Communications, Inc. dated October 5, 2007
|
Incorp.
by reference9
|
14.1
|
Code
of Ethics, approved by the Board of Directors on August 23,
2006
|
Incorp.
by reference6
|
|
Subsidiaries
of the registrant
|
This
filing
|
|
Consent
of Jones Simkins P.C., Company’s independent auditors for the year ending
June 30, 2008
|
This
filing
|
|
Consent
of Hansen Barnett & Maxwell, P.C., Company’s independent auditors for
the year ending June 30, 2006
|
This
filing
|
|
Section
302 Certification of Chief Executive Officer
|
This
filing
|
|
Section
302 Certification of Interim Chief Financial Officer
|
This
filing
|
|
Section
1350 Certification of Chief Executive Officer
|
This
filing
|
|
Section
1350 Certification of Interim Chief Financial Officer
|
This
filing
|
______________
*Constitutes
a management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.
1
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s registration statement on Form S-3/A
filed with the Commission on November 1,
2002.
|
3
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2003.
|
4
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2004.
|
6
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2006.
|
7
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s registration statement on form S-8 filed
with the Commission on October 6,
2006.
|
8
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2007.
|
9
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 2007.
|
10
|
Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s registration statement on Form S-8 filed
with the Commission on January 22,
2008.
|
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.
|
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September
10, 2008
|
By:
|
/s/ Zeynep Hakimoglu
|
|
|
Zeynep
Hakimoglu
|
|
|
President,
Chief Executive Officer, and
Chairman
|
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
capacity and on the dates indicated.
Signature
|
Title
|
Date
|
|
|
|
/s/ Zeynep Hakimoglu
|
President,
Chief Executive Officer, and Chairman
|
September
10, 2008
|
Zeynep
Hakimoglu
|
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Greg A. LeClaire
|
Chief
Financial Officer
|
September
10, 2008
|
Greg
A. LeClaire
|
(Principal
Financial and Accounting Officer)
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Brad R. Baldwin
|
Director
|
September
10, 2008
|
Brad
R. Baldwin
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Larry R. Hendricks
|
Director
|
September
10, 2008
|
Larry
R. Hendricks
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Scott M. Huntsman
|
Director
|
September
10, 2008
|
Scott
M. Huntsman
|
|
|
ITEM
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Index to Consolidated
Financial Statements
|
Page
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm – Jones Simkins,
P.C.
|
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm – Hansen Barnett &
Maxwell, P.C.
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2008 and 2007
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for fiscal years ended
June 30, 2008, 2007, and 2006
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Shareholders' Equity for fiscal years ended June 30, 2008,
2007, and 2006
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for fiscal years ended June 30, 2008, 2007, and
2006
|
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm –
To the
Board of Directors and
Shareholders
of ClearOne Communications, Inc.
We have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of ClearOne Communications,
Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of June 30, 2008 and 2007, and the
related consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income,
shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for the years ended June 30, 2008 and 2007.
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based
on our audits. The consolidated financial statements as of June 30, 2006 and for
the year then ended , before the adjustments for the camera business described
in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements, were audited by other
auditors whose report, dated August 21, 2006, expressed an unqualified opinion
on those statements.
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. The Company is not required to
have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over
financial reporting. Our audit included consideration of internal control over
financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are
appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an
opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, 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 financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of ClearOne Communications, Inc. as of
June 30, 2008 and 2007, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for
the years ended June 30, 2008 and 2007 in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America.
We also
audited the adjustments for the camera business described in Note 3 that were
applied to restate the 2006 consolidated financial statements for the
discontinued operations. In our opinion, such adjustments are appropriate and
have been properly applied. We were not engaged to audit, review, or apply any
procedures to the 2006 consolidated financial statements of the Company other
than with respect to the adjustments and, accordingly, we do not express an
opinion or any other form of assurance on the 2006 consolidated financial
statements taken as a whole.
/s/ Jones Simkins,
P.C.
JONES
SIMKINS, P.C.
Logan,
Utah
September
2, 2008
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm –
To the
Board of Directors and the Shareholders
ClearOne
Communications, Inc.
We have
audited, before the effects of the adjustments to retrospectively apply the
change in accounting described in Note 3, the accompanying consolidated
statements of operations and comprehensive income, shareholders’ equity, and
cash flows of ClearOne Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended
June 30, 2006 (the June 30, 2006 financial statements before the effects of the
adjustments discussed in Note 3 are not presented herein). These
consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these
consolidated financial statements based on our 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
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 audit provides a reasonable basis
for our opinion.
In our
opinion, the June 30, 2006 consolidated financial statements, before the effects
of the adjustments to retrospectively apply the change in accounting described
in Note 3, present fairly, in all material respects, the results of operations
of ClearOne Communications, Inc. and subsidiaries and their cash flows for the
year ended June 30, 2006 in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.
We were
not engaged to audit, review, or apply any procedures to the adjustments to
retrospectively apply the change in accounting described in Note 3 and,
accordingly, we do not express an opinion or any other form of assurance about
whether such adjustments are appropriate and have been properly
applied. Those adjustments were audited by Jones Simkins,
P.C.
HANSEN,
BARNETT & MAXWELL, P.C.
Salt Lake
City, Utah
August
21, 2006
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
|
|
June
30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
3,327 |
|
|
$ |
2,782 |
|
Marketable
securities
|
|
|
5,922 |
|
|
|
19,871 |
|
Accounts
receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of
$87 and $54, respectively
|
|
|
7,238 |
|
|
|
8,025 |
|
Deposit,
bond for preliminary injunction
|
|
|
908 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Note
receivable
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
Inventories,
net
|
|
|
7,799 |
|
|
|
7,263 |
|
Deferred
income taxes
|
|
|
2,828 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Prepaid
expenses and other assets
|
|
|
820 |
|
|
|
213 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
28,885 |
|
|
|
38,317 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term
marketable securities
|
|
|
11,168 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Property
and equipment, net
|
|
|
2,554 |
|
|
|
2,694 |
|
Intangible
assets, net
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Note
receiveable - long-term
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Long-term
deferred tax asset
|
|
|
1,639 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
44,300 |
|
|
$ |
41,063 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
$ |
2,187 |
|
|
$ |
1,745 |
|
Accrued
income taxes
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
660 |
|
Accrued
liabilities
|
|
|
3,600 |
|
|
|
1,874 |
|
Deferred
product revenue
|
|
|
4,547 |
|
|
|
4,872 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
10,406 |
|
|
|
9,151 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
rent
|
|
|
700 |
|
|
|
855 |
|
Other
long-term liabilities
|
|
|
1,054 |
|
|
|
619 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
|
12,160 |
|
|
|
10,625 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders'
equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock, par value $0.001, 50,000,000 shares authorized,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,228,902
and 10,861,920 shares issued and outstanding, respectively
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
|
44,618 |
|
|
|
47,582 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(694 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Accumulated
deficit
|
|
|
(11,794 |
) |
|
|
(17,155 |
) |
Total
shareholders' equity
|
|
|
32,140 |
|
|
|
30,438 |
|
Total
liabilities and shareholders' equity
|
|
$ |
44,300 |
|
|
$ |
41,063 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
|
|
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
|
|
Years
Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
39,752 |
|
|
$ |
39,861 |
|
|
$ |
35,362 |
|
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
|
16,461 |
|
|
|
17,723 |
|
|
|
17,375 |
|
Gross
profit
|
|
|
23,291 |
|
|
|
22,138 |
|
|
|
17,987 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
& marketing
|
|
|
6,673 |
|
|
|
7,791 |
|
|
|
7,866 |
|
Research
and product development
|
|
|
7,070 |
|
|
|
7,535 |
|
|
|
8,299 |
|
General
and administrative
|
|
|
7,669 |
|
|
|
3,091 |
|
|
|
5,108 |
|
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1,205 |
) |
Total
operating expenses
|
|
|
21,412 |
|
|
|
18,417 |
|
|
|
20,068 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
income (loss)
|
|
|
1,879 |
|
|
|
3,721 |
|
|
|
(2,081 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
income (expense), net:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
income
|
|
|
1,039 |
|
|
|
1,468 |
|
|
|
813 |
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Other,
net
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
Total
other income (expense), net
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
1,523 |
|
|
|
1,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
2,884 |
|
|
|
5,244 |
|
|
|
(1,065 |
) |
(Provision)
benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
2,756 |
|
|
|
(457 |
) |
|
|
1,005 |
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
5,640 |
|
|
|
4,787 |
|
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discontinued
operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
361 |
|
Gain
on disposal of discontinued operations
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
598 |
|
|
|
2,726 |
|
Income
tax provision
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(251 |
) |
|
|
(931 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
2,156 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
5,656 |
|
|
$ |
5,209 |
|
|
$ |
2,096 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
5,656 |
|
|
$ |
5,209 |
|
|
$ |
2,096 |
|
Unrealized
(loss) on marketable securities, net of taxes of $413
|
|
$ |
(694 |
) |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive
income
|
|
$ |
4,962 |
|
|
$ |
5,209 |
|
|
$ |
2,096 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
|
|
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
|
|
Years
Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
earnings (loss) per common share from continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
$ |
0.42 |
|
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
Diluted
earnings (loss) per common share from continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
0.52 |
|
|
$ |
0.41 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
earnings per common share from discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
Diluted
earnings per common share from discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
0.04 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
earnings per common share
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
$ |
0.45 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
Diluted
earnings per common share
|
|
$ |
0.52 |
|
|
$ |
0.45 |
|
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
weighted average shares outstanding
|
|
|
10,694,401 |
|
|
|
11,497,773 |
|
|
|
11,957,756 |
|
Diluted
weighted average shares outstanding
|
|
|
10,798,281 |
|
|
|
11,575,721 |
|
|
|
12,206,618 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
|
|
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Deferred
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Shareholders'
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances
at June 30, 2005
|
|
|
11,264,233 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
49,393 |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(24,460 |
) |
|
|
24,911 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance
of Common Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
related
to shareholder
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
settlement
agreement
|
|
|
920,494 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2,263 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,264 |
|
Compensation
expense resulting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
from
the modification of stock
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
options
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
16 |
|
Compensation
cost associated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
with
SFAS No. 123R
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,092 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,092 |
|
SFAS
No. 123R transition
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
expense
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,096 |
|
|
|
2,096 |
|
Balances
at June 30, 2006
|
|
|
12,184,727 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
52,764 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(22,364 |
) |
|
|
30,412 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tender
offer
|
|
|
(1,073,552 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(4,602 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(4,603 |
) |
Stock
buy back program
|
|
|
(265,360 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1,450 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(1,450 |
) |
Exercise
of stock options
|
|
|
15,940 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
54 |
|
Tax
benefit stock option exercise
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Compensation
cost associated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
with
SFAS No. 123R
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
802 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
802 |
|
Employee
stock purchase program
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
4 |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
5,209 |
|
|
|
5,209 |
|
Balances
at June 30, 2007
|
|
|
10,861,920 |
|
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
$ |
47,582 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
(17,155 |
) |
|
$ |
30,438 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
buy back program
|
|
|
(834,646 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(4,354 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(4,355 |
) |
Exercise
of stock options
|
|
|
228,368 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
792 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
792 |
|
Shares
received/retired upon
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
exercise
of stock options
|
|
|
(28,066 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(186 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(186 |
) |
Tax
benefit stock option exercise
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
70 |
|
Compensation
cost associated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
with
SFAS No. 123R
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
707 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
707 |
|
Employee
stock purchase program
|
|
|
1,326 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Adoption
of FIN 48
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(295 |
) |
|
|
(295 |
) |
Unrealized (loss) on marketable
securities,
net of tax
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(694 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(694 |
) |
Net
income
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
5,656 |
|
|
|
5,656 |
|
Balances
at June 30, 2008
|
|
|
10,228,902 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
$ |
44,618 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
(694 |
) |
|
$ |
(11,794 |
) |
|
$ |
32,140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
|
|
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
|
|
Years
Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
5,640 |
|
|
$ |
4,787 |
|
|
$ |
(60 |
) |
Adjustments
to reconcile net income (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to
net cash provided by operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment
on marketable securities
|
|
|
155 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Depreciation
and amortization expense
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
870 |
|
|
|
1,389 |
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
|
|
714 |
|
|
|
806 |
|
|
|
1,140 |
|
Write-off
of inventory
|
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
660 |
|
|
|
681 |
|
(Gain)
loss on disposal of assets
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(58 |
) |
|
|
(237 |
) |
Provision
for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable
|
|
|
322 |
|
|
|
(261 |
) |
|
|
(928 |
) |
Deferred
taxes
|
|
|
(4,467 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Deposit
- bond for preliminary injunction
|
|
|
(908 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Notes
receivable
|
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
(206 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(672 |
) |
|
|
(1,309 |
) |
|
|
(2,236 |
) |
Prepaids
and other assets
|
|
|
(590 |
) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
875 |
|
|
|
(811 |
) |
|
|
434 |
|
Accrued
liabilities
|
|
|
1,726 |
|
|
|
(673 |
) |
|
|
(960 |
) |
Other
long term liabilities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
619 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Accrued
income taxes
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
3,267 |
|
|
|
1,345 |
|
Deferred
product revenue
|
|
|
(325 |
) |
|
|
(999 |
) |
|
|
816 |
|
Net
cash provided by continuing operating activities
|
|
|
3,525 |
|
|
|
6,737 |
|
|
|
1,432 |
|
Net
cash provided by discontinued operating activities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
730 |
|
Net
cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
3,525 |
|
|
|
6,784 |
|
|
|
2,162 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase
of property and equipment
|
|
|
(786 |
) |
|
|
(909 |
) |
|
|
(224 |
) |
Purchase
of intangible assets
|
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Proceeds
from the sale of property and equipment
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
Purchase
of marketable securities
|
|
|
(15,378 |
) |
|
|
(23,369 |
) |
|
|
(14,800 |
) |
Sale
of marketable securities
|
|
|
16,897 |
|
|
|
24,050 |
|
|
|
10,050 |
|
Net
cash provided by (used in) continuing investing activities
|
|
|
684 |
|
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
|
(4,744 |
) |
Net
cash provided by discontinued investing activities
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
941 |
|
|
|
1,930 |
|
Net
cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
700 |
|
|
|
748 |
|
|
|
(2,814 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds
from the issuance of common stock - options
|
|
|
605 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Common
stock purchased and retired
|
|
|
(4,355 |
) |
|
|
(6,053 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Tax
benefit from stock options
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net
cash used in financing activities
|
|
|
(3,680 |
) |
|
|
(5,990 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
1,542 |
|
|
|
(652 |
) |
Cash
and cash equivalents at the beginning of the year
|
|
|
2,782 |
|
|
|
1,240 |
|
|
|
1,892 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at the end of the year
|
|
$ |
3,327 |
|
|
$ |
2,782 |
|
|
$ |
1,240 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
|
|
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
|
|
Years
Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
paid for interest
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Cash
paid (received) for income taxes
|
|
|
1,701 |
|
|
|
(3,202 |
) |
|
|
(1,419 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
disclosure of non-cash financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adoption
of FIN48
|
|
$ |
295 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Exchanged
accounts receivable from a vendor with accounts payable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
to
the same vendor
|
|
|
432 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Lease
incentive for leasehold improvements
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,088 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Sales
of property and equipment for accounts payable
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Value
of common shares issued in shareholder settlement
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2,264 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
|
|
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
1.
|
Organization
– Nature of Operations
|
ClearOne
Communications, Inc., a Utah corporation, and its subsidiaries (collectively,
the “Company”) develop, manufacture, market, and service a comprehensive line of
audio conferencing products, which range from personal conferencing products to
tabletop conferencing phones to professionally installed audio systems. The
Company’s solutions create a natural communication environment, designed to save
organizations time and money by enabling more effective and efficient
communication between geographically separated businesses, employees, and
customers.
2.
|
Summary
of Significant Accounting Policies
|
Consolidation – These
consolidated financial statements include the financial statements of ClearOne
Communications, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries. The discontinued
operations portion of these consolidated financial statements include
transactions from our previously wholly owned subsidiaries. All
intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in
consolidation.
Pervasiveness of Estimates –
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles in the United States of America requires management to
make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date
of the financial statements and the reported amounts of sales and expenses
during the reporting periods. Key estimates in the accompanying
consolidated financial statements include, among others, revenue recognition,
allowances for doubtful accounts and product returns, provisions for obsolete
inventory, valuation of long-lived assets, and deferred income tax asset
valuation allowances. Actual results could differ materially from
these estimates.
Foreign Currency Translation
–The results of operations for the Company’s foreign subsidiaries in the
United Kingdom, Germany and Hong Kong are recorded by the subsidiaries in the
British Pound, Euro and Hong Kong dollar, respectively and remeasured in the
U.S. Dollar. Assets and liabilities are translated or remeasured into
U.S. dollars at the exchange rate prevailing on the balance sheet date or the
historical rate, as appropriate. Revenue and expenses are translated
or remeasured at average rates of exchange prevailing during the
period. The impact from remeasurement of our foreign subsidiaries is
recorded in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. Upon making
the translations to the U.S. Dollar we concluded that as of the balance sheet
date the impact of such re-measurements was immaterial and as such have posted
through our statement of income as opposed to including in other comprehensive
income.
Concentration Risk – We
depend on an outsourced manufacturing strategy for its products. We outsource
the manufacture of all of our products to third-party manufacturers located in
both the U.S. and Asia. If any of these manufacturers experience difficulties in
obtaining sufficient supplies of components, component prices significantly
exceed anticipated costs, an interruption in their operations, or otherwise
suffer capacity constraints, we would experience a delay in shipping these
products which would have a negative impact on our revenues. Should there be any
disruption in services due to natural disaster, economic or political
difficulties, quarantines, transportation restrictions, acts of terror, or other
restrictions associated with infectious diseases, or other similar events, or
any other reason, such disruption would have a material adverse effect on our
business. Operating in the international environment exposes us to certain
inherent risks, including unexpected changes in regulatory requirements and
tariffs, and potentially adverse tax consequences, which could materially affect
our results of operations. Currently, we have no second source of manufacturing
for a portion of our products.
Cash Equivalents – The
Company considers all highly-liquid investments with a maturity of three months
or less, when purchased, to be cash equivalents. The Company places
its temporary cash investments with high-quality financial
institutions. At times, including at June 30, 2008 and 2007, such
investments may be in excess of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
insurance limit of $100.
Marketable Securities – The
Company’s marketable securities are classified as available-for-sale securities,
are carried at fair value which approximated cost and generally have original
maturities of greater than one year. Management determines the
appropriate classifications of investments at the time of purchase, based on
management’s intent to use these investments during the normal operating cycle
of the business, and reevaluates such designation as of each balance sheet
date.
The
Company considers highly liquid marketable securities with an effective maturity
to the Company of less than one year, and held as available-for-sale, to be
current assets. The Company defines effective maturity as the shorter
of the original maturity to the Company or the effective availability as a
result of periodic auction or optional redemption features of these marketable
securities.
The
Company regularly monitors and evaluates the value of its marketable
securities. In accordance with SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments
in Debt and Equity Securities, and related guidance issued by FASB and
the SEC which calls for the classification of impairments as “temporary” or
“other-than-temporary.” A temporary impairment charge results in an unrealized
loss being recorded in the other comprehensive income (loss) component of
stockholders’ equity. Such an unrealized loss does not affect net income (loss)
for the applicable reporting period. An other-than-temporary impairment charge
is recorded as a recognized loss in the consolidated statement of operations and
reduces net income (loss) for the applicable reporting period. The
differentiating factors between temporary and other-than-temporary impairment
are primarily the length of the time and the extent to which the market value
has been less than cost, the financial condition and near-term prospects of the
issuer and the intent and ability of the Company to retain its investment with
the issuer for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery
in market value. When assessing marketable securities for other-than-temporary
declines in value, the Company considers such factors, among other things, as
how significant the decline in value is as a percentage of the original cost,
how long the market value of the investment has been less than its original
cost, the collateral supporting the investments, insurance policies which
protect the Company’s investment position, the interval between auction periods,
whether or not there have been any failed auctions, and the credit rating issued
for the securities by one or more of the major credit rating
agencies.
A decline
in the market value of any available-for-sale security below cost that is deemed
to be other-than-temporary results in a reduction in carrying amount to fair
value. The impairment is charged to earnings and a new cost basis for
the security is established. During 2008 the Company recognized an
other-than-temporary impairment. For each of the fiscal years ended June 30,
2007 and 2006 realized gains and losses upon the sale of available-for-sale
securities were insignificant. Please refer to Note 7.
Unrealized
holding gains and losses, net of the related tax effect on available-for-sale
securities, are excluded from earnings and are reported as a separate component
of other comprehensive income until realized. During 2008, the Company
determined there was a temporary decline in the fair value of its investments in
auction-rate securities resulting in an unrealized loss in other comprehensive
income. Based on current credit market conditions, it is likely that future
auctions related to these securities will be unsuccessful in the near term. Such
an unrealized loss does not affect net income (loss) for the applicable
reporting period. No such unrealized losses were recorded for the
fiscal years ended June 30, 2007 and 2006. Please refer to Note 7.
Accounts Receivable –
Accounts receivable are recorded at the invoiced amount. Generally,
credit is granted to customers without requiring collateral. The
allowance for doubtful accounts is the Company’s best estimate of the amount of
probable credit losses in the Company’s existing accounts
receivable. Management regularly analyzes accounts receivable
including current aging, historical write-off experience, customer
concentrations, customer creditworthiness, and current economic trends when
evaluating the adequacy of the allowance for doubtful accounts. If
the assumptions that are used to determine the allowance for doubtful accounts
change, the Company may have to provide for a greater level of expense in future
periods or reverse amounts provided in prior periods.
The
Company’s allowance for doubtful accounts activity for the fiscal years ended
June 30, 2008 and 2007 were as follows:
Description
|
|
Balance
at Beginning of Period
|
|
|
Charged
to Costs and Expenses
|
|
|
Deductions
|
|
|
Balance
at End of Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended June 30, 2007
|
|
$ |
49 |
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
$ |
(7 |
) |
|
$ |
54 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended June 30, 2008
|
|
$ |
54 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
87 |
|
Inventories – Inventories are
valued at the lower of cost or market, with cost computed on a first-in,
first-out (“FIFO”) basis. Inventoried costs include material, direct
engineering and production costs, and applicable overhead, not in excess of
estimated realizable value. Consideration is given to obsolescence,
excessive levels, deterioration, direct selling expenses, and other factors in
evaluating net realizable value. Consigned inventory includes product
that has been delivered to customers for which revenue recognition criteria have
not been met.
Property and Equipment –
Property and equipment are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and
amortization. Expenditures that materially increase values or
capacities or extend useful lives of property and equipment are
capitalized. Routine maintenance, repairs, and renewal costs are
expensed as incurred. Gains or losses from the sale, trade-in or
retirement of property and equipment are recorded in current operations and the
related book value of the property is removed from property and equipment
accounts and the related accumulated depreciation and amortization
accounts.
Estimated
useful lives are generally two to ten years. Depreciation and
amortization are calculated over the estimated useful lives of the respective
assets using the straight-line method. Leasehold improvement
amortization is computed using the straight-line method over the shorter of the
lease term or the estimated useful life of the related assets.
Impairment of Long-Lived
Assets – Long-lived assets, such as property, equipment, and
definite-lived intangibles subject to amortization, are reviewed for impairment
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of
an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of assets to be held
and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of an asset or asset
group to estimated future undiscounted net cash flows of the related asset or
group of assets over their remaining lives. If the carrying amount of
an asset exceeds its estimated future undiscounted cash flows, an impairment
charge is recognized for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the
estimated fair value of the asset. Impairment of long-lived assets is
assessed at the lowest levels for which there are identifiable cash flows that
are independent of other groups of assets. The impairment of
long-lived assets requires judgments and estimates. If circumstances
change, such estimates could also change.
Revenue Recognition – Product
revenue is recognized when (i) the products are shipped, (ii) persuasive
evidence of an arrangement exists, (iii) the price is fixed and determinable,
and (iv) collection is reasonably assured.
The
Company extends credit to customers who it believes have the wherewithal to pay.
The Company has in place credit policies and procedures, an approval process for
sales returns and credit memos, processes for managing and monitoring channel
inventory levels.
The
Company provides a right of return on product sales to distributors. Further,
revenue from product sales to distributors is not recognized until the return
privilege has expired, which approximates when product is sold-through to
customers of the Company’s distributors (dealers, system integrators,
value-added resellers, and end-users) rather than when the product is initially
shipped to a distributor. The Company evaluates, at each quarter-end,
the inventory in the channel through information provided by certain
distributors. The level of inventory in the channel will fluctuate up or
down, each quarter, based upon these distributors’ individual operations.
Accordingly, each quarter-end revenue deferral is calculated and recorded based
upon the underlying, estimated channel inventory at quarter-end. Although,
certain distributors provide certain channel inventory amounts, the Company
makes judgments and estimates with regard to the amount of inventory in the
entire channel, for all customers and for all channel inventory
items, and the appropriate revenue and cost of goods
sold associated with those channel products. Although
these assumptions and judgments regarding total channel inventory, revenue,
and cost of goods sold could differ from actual amounts, the Company
believes that its calculations are indicative of actual levels of inventory in
the distribution channel. The amounts of deferred cost of goods sold were
included in consigned inventory. The following table details the
amount of deferred revenue, cost of goods sold, and gross profit at each fiscal
year end for the three years in the period ended June 30, 2008.
|
|
Deferred Revenue
|
|
|
Deferred Cost of Goods Sold
|
|
|
Deferred Gross Profit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June
30, 2008
|
|
$ |
4,547 |
|
|
$ |
1,719 |
|
|
$ |
2,828 |
|
June
30, 2007
|
|
|
4,872 |
|
|
|
2,115 |
|
|
|
2,757 |
|
June
30, 2006
|
|
|
5,871 |
|
|
|
2,817 |
|
|
|
3,054 |
|
The
Company offers rebates and market development funds to certain of its
distributors, dealers/resellers, and end-users based upon volume of product
purchased by them. The Company records rebates as a reduction of
revenue in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 00-22,
“Accounting for Points and Certain Other Time-Based or Volume-Based Sales
Incentive Offers, and Offers for Free Products or Services to Be Delivered in
the Future.” The Company also follows EITF Issue No. 01-9,
“Accounting for Consideration Given by a Vendor to a Customer (Including a
Reseller of the Vendor’s Products).” The Company continues to record
rebates as a reduction of revenue in the period revenue is
recognized.
The
Company provides advance replacement units to end-users on defective units of
certain products within 90 days of purchase date by the
end-user. Since the purpose of these units are not revenue
generating, the Company tracks the units due from the end-user, valued at retail
price, until the defective unit has been returned, but no receivable balance is
maintained on the Company’s balance sheet. The retail price value of
in-transit advance replacement units was $816, $230 and $81, as of June 30,
2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively.
Shipping and Handling Costs –
Shipping and handling billed to customers is recorded as
revenue. Shipping and handling costs are included in cost of goods
sold.
Warranty Costs – The Company
accrues for warranty costs based on estimated warranty return rates and
estimated costs to repair. Factors that affect the Company’s warranty
liability include the number of units sold, historical and anticipated rates of
warranty returns, and repair cost. The Company reviews the adequacy
of its recorded warranty accrual on a quarterly basis.
Changes
in the Company’s warranty accrual during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2008
and 2007 follows:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance
at the beginning of year
|
|
$ |
125 |
|
|
$ |
169 |
|
Accruals/additions
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
Usage
|
|
|
(243 |
) |
|
|
(285 |
) |
Balance
at end of year
|
|
$ |
211 |
|
|
$ |
125 |
|
Advertising – The Company
expenses advertising costs as incurred. Advertising expenses consist
of trade shows, magazine advertisements, and other forms of
media. Advertising expenses for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2008,
2007, and 2006 totaled $943, $741, and $631, respectively, and are included in
the caption Sales & Marketing.
Research and Product Development
Costs – The Company expenses research and product development costs as
incurred.
Income Taxes – The Company
uses the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes. Under the
asset and liability method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized
for the future tax consequences attributable to temporary differences between
the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and
their respective tax bases, and operating loss and tax credit carry-forwards.
These temporary differences will result in deductible or taxable amounts in
future years when the reported amounts of the assets or liabilities are
recovered or settled. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are
measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the
years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or
settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax
rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. A
valuation allowance is provided when it is more likely than not that some or all
of the deferred tax assets may not be realized. The Company evaluates
the realizability of its net deferred tax assets on a quarterly basis and
valuation allowances are provided, as necessary. Adjustments to the
valuation allowance increase or decrease the Company’s income tax provision or
benefit. During the fourth fiscal quarter of 2008 the Company reversed a $4,100
valuation allowance recorded against deferred tax assets increasing its 2008
income tax benefit.
During
the first quarter of 2008, the Company adopted FASB issued Interpretation No. 48
(“FIN 48”). Under FIN 48, the Company recognizes the tax benefit from an
uncertain tax position only if it is at least more likely than not that the tax
position will be sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based on
the technical merits of the position.
Judgment
is required in determining the provision for income taxes and related accruals,
deferred tax assets and liabilities. In the ordinary course of business, there
are transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax outcome is uncertain.
Additionally, the Company’s tax returns are subject to audit by various tax
authorities. Although the Company believes that its estimates are reasonable,
actual results could differ from these estimates.
Earnings Per Share – The
following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted earnings (loss)
per common share:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Numerator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
5,640 |
|
|
$ |
4,787 |
|
|
$ |
(60 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
Gain
on disposal of discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
1,930 |
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
5,656 |
|
|
$ |
5,209 |
|
|
$ |
2,096 |
|
Denominator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
weighted average shares
|
|
|
10,694,401 |
|
|
|
11,497,773 |
|
|
|
11,957,756 |
|
Dilutive
common stock equivalents using treasury stock method
|
|
|
103,880 |
|
|
|
77,948 |
|
|
|
248,862 |
|
Diluted
weighted average shares
|
|
|
10,798,281 |
|
|
|
11,575,721 |
|
|
|
12,206,618 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
earnings (loss) per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
$ |
0.42 |
|
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
Discontinued
operations
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
Disposal
of discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
0.53 |
|
|
$ |
0.45 |
|
|
$ |
0.18 |
|
Diluted
earnings (loss) per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
0.52 |
|
|
$ |
0.41 |
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
Disposal
of discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.16 |
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
0.52 |
|
|
$ |
0.45 |
|
|
$ |
0.17 |
|
Options
to purchase a weighted-average of 1,190,269, 1,206,311 and 1,355,179 shares of
common stock were outstanding during fiscal 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively,
but were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per share as the
effect would be anti-dilutive. Warrants to purchase 150,000 shares of
common stock expired on November, 27, 2006 and were outstanding as of June 30,
2006, but were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per share as
the effect would be anti-dilutive.
Share-Based Payment – In December 2004, the
Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued SFAS No. 123R, “Share-Based
Payment.” SFAS No. 123R is a revision of SFAS No.
123. SFAS No. 123R establishes standards for the accounting of
transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or
services. Primarily, SFAS No. 123R focuses on accounting for
transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in share-based payment
transactions. It also addresses transactions in which an entity
incurs liabilities in exchange for goods or services that are based on the fair
value of the entity’s equity instruments or that may be settled by the issuance
of those equity instruments.
SFAS No.
123R requires the Company to measure the cost of employee services received in
exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the grant date fair value
of the award (with limited exceptions). That cost will be recognized
over the period during which an employee is required to provide service in
exchange for the awards – the requisite service period (usually the vesting
period). No compensation cost is recognized for equity instruments
for which employees do not render the requisite service. Therefore,
if an employee does not ultimately render the requisite service, the costs
associated with the unvested options will not be recognized,
cumulatively.
Effective
July 1, 2005, the Company adopted SFAS No. 123R and its fair value recognition
provisions using the modified prospective transition method. Under
this transition method, stock-based compensation cost recognized after July 1,
2005 includes the straight-line basis compensation cost for (a) all share-based
payments granted prior to July 1, 2005, but not yet vested, based on the grant
date fair values used for the pro-forma disclosures under the original SFAS No.
123 and (b) all share-based payments granted or modified on or after July 1,
2005, in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 123R. See Note 13
for information about the Company’s various share-based compensation plans, the
impact of adoption of SFAS No. 123R, and the assumptions used to calculate the
fair value of share-based compensation.
If
assumptions change in the application of SFAS No. 123R in future periods, the
stock-based compensation cost ultimately recorded under SFAS No. 123R may differ
significantly from what was recorded in the current period.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements
(“SFAS No. 157”), which defines fair value, establishes guidelines for measuring
fair value and expands disclosure regarding fair value measurements. SFAS No.
157 does not require new fair value measurements but rather eliminates
inconsistencies in guidance found in various prior accounting pronouncements.
SFAS No. 157 is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007, on a prospective basis. We do not
expect the adoption of SFAS No. 157 to have a material effect on our financial
statements.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS 159 “The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities.” This statement permits entities to
choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other items at fair
value that are not currently required to be measured at fair
value. The objective is to improve financial reporting by providing
entities with the opportunity to mitigate volatility in reported earnings caused
by measuring related assets and liabilities differently without having to apply
complex hedge accounting provisions. This statement requires a
business entity to report unrealized gains and losses on items for which the
fair value option has been elected in earnings at each subsequent reporting
date. An entity may decide whether to elect the fair value option for
each eligible item on its election date, subject to certain requirements
described in the statement. SFAS 159 is effective for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007. We are currently reviewing the
requirements of SFAS 159 and, at this point in time, have not determined the
impact, if any, that this statement may have on our results of operations and
financial position.
In
December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R), “Business Combinations.” SFAS
141(R) requires all business combinations completed after the effective date to
be accounted for by applying the acquisition method (previously referred to as
the purchase method). Companies applying this method will have to
identify the acquirer, determine the acquisition date and purchase price and
recognize at their acquisition-date fair values the identifiable assets
acquired, liabilities assumed, and any noncontrolling interests in the
acquiree. In the case of a bargain purchase the acquirer is required
to reevaluate the measurements of the recognized assets and liabilities at the
acquisition date and recognize a gain on that date if an excess
remains. SFAS 141(R) becomes effective for fiscal periods beginning
after December 15, 2008. The Company is currently evaluating the
impact of SFAS 141(R).
3. Discontinued
Operations
During
fiscal 2005, the Company completed the sale of its conferencing services
business component to Premiere and its Canadian audiovisual integration services
to 6351352 Canada Inc. During fiscal 2006, the Company received the
$1,000 Indemnity Escrow payment from Premiere, certain payments on the note
receivable from the new owners of OM Video, and full satisfaction of the
promissory note with Burk Technology, Inc. (“Burk”). During fiscal
2007, the Company sold its document and educational camera business to
Ken-A-Vision Manufacturing Company, Inc. (“Ken-A-Vision”) and appointed a
receiver over the assets of OM Video. Accordingly, the results of
operations and the financial position of each of these components have been
reclassified in the accompanying consolidated financial statements as
discontinued operations. Summary operating results of the
discontinued operations are as follows:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ken-A-Vision
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
75 |
|
|
$ |
361 |
|
Total
income from discontinued operations
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
361 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain
(loss) on disposal of discontinued operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conferencing
services business
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
1,030 |
|
OM
Video
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
607 |
|
|
|
350 |
|
Burk
Technology
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1,346 |
|
Ken-A-Vision
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Total
gain on disposal of discontinued operations
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
598 |
|
|
|
2,726 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
tax provision
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conferencing
services business
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
(301 |
) |
OM
Video
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(227 |
) |
|
|
(102 |
) |
Burk
Technology
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(393 |
) |
Ken-A-Vision
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(135 |
) |
Total
income tax provision
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(251 |
) |
|
|
(931 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
income from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conferencing
services business
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
729 |
|
OM
Video
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
380 |
|
|
|
248 |
|
Burk
Technology
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
953 |
|
Ken-A-Vision
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
Total
income from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
422 |
|
|
$ |
2,156 |
|
Conferencing
Services
On July
1, 2004, the Company sold its conferencing services business component to
Premiere. Consideration for the sale consisted of $21,300 in
cash. Of the purchase price, $300 was placed into a working capital
escrow account and an additional $1,000 was placed into an 18-month Indemnity
Escrow account. The Company received the $300 working capital escrow
funds approximately 90 days after the execution date of the
contract. The Company received the $1,000 in the Indemnity Escrow
account together with the $30 in related interest income in January
2006. Additionally, $1,365 of the proceeds was utilized to pay off
equipment leases pertaining to assets being conveyed to Premiere. The
Company realized a pre-tax gain on the sale of $1,030 and $17,369 during the
fiscal years ended June 30, 2006 and 2005.
OM
Video
In
December 2004, a group of investors approached the Company about a possible
purchase of OM Video. On January 27, 2005, the Company’s Board of
Directors authorized its Chief Executive Officer to continue discussions
regarding a stock sale of OM Video, its Canadian audiovisual integration
services business component. The Company decided to sell this
component after it deemphasized Canadian Business Services
contracts.
On March
4, 2005, the Company sold all of the issued and outstanding stock of its
Canadian subsidiary, ClearOne Communications of Canada, Inc. (“ClearOne Canada”)
to 6351352 Canada Inc., a Canada corporation. ClearOne Canada owned
all the issued and outstanding stock of Stechyson Electronics, Ltd., which
conducts business under the name OM Video. The Company agreed to sell
the stock of ClearOne Canada for $200 in cash; a $1,256 note receivable over a
15-month period, with interest accruing on the unpaid balance at the rate of 5.3
percent per year; and contingent consideration ranging from 3.0 percent to 4.0
percent of related gross revenues over a five-year period. In June
2005, the Company was advised that the OM Purchaser had settled an action
brought by the former employer of certain of OM Purchaser’s owners and employees
alleging violation of non-competition agreements. The settlement
reportedly involved a cash payment and an agreement not to sell certain products
for a period of one year. Based on an analysis of the facts and
circumstances that existed at the end of fiscal 2005, and considering the
guidance from Topic 5U of the SEC Rules and Regulations, “Gain Recognition on
the Sale of a Business or Operating Assets to a Highly Leveraged Entity,” the
gain is being recognized as cash is collected (as collection was not reasonably
assured). Through December 31, 2005, all required payments had
been made however, 6351352 Canada Inc. failed to make any subsequent, required
payments under the note receivable until June 30, 2006, when we received a
payment of $50. The Company reevaluated its options and concluded that its best
course of action was to enforce its security and appoint a receiver over the
assets of OM Video. As of June 30, 2008, the amount of the promissory note and
contingent earn-out provision was approximately $696 which is net of $632
collected through receivership. The Company does not expect to collect any
further amounts through the receivership.
Burk
Technology
On April
12, 2001, the Company sold the assets of the remote control portion of the
RFM/Broadcast division to Burk, a privately held developer and manufacturer of
broadcast facility control systems products. The Company retained the
accounts payable of the remote control portion of the RFM/Broadcast
division. Burk assumed obligations for unfilled customer orders and
for satisfying warranty obligations to existing customers and for inventory sold
to Burk. However, the Company retained certain warranty obligations
to Burk to ensure that all of the assets sold to Burk were in good operating
condition and repair.
Consideration
for the sale consisted of $750 in cash at closing, $1,750 in the form of a
seven-year promissory note, with interest at the rate of nine percent per year,
and up to $700 as a commission over a period of up to seven years. The payments
on the promissory note could be deferred based upon Burk not meeting net
quarterly sales levels established within the agreement. The
promissory note was secured by a subordinate security interest in the personal
property of Burk. Based on an analysis of the facts and circumstances
that existed on April 12, 2001, and considering the guidance from Topic 5U of
the SEC Rules and Regulations, “Gain Recognition on the Sale of a Business or
Operating Assets to a Highly Leveraged Entity,” the gain is being recognized as
cash is collected (as collection was not reasonably assured and the Company had
contingent liabilities to Burk at closing). The commission was based
upon future net sales of Burk over base sales established within the
agreement. The Company realized a gain on the sale of $1,346 and $187
for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
On August
22, 2005, the Company entered into a Mutual Release and Waiver Agreement with
Burk pursuant to which Burk paid the Company $1,346 in full satisfaction of the
promissory note, which included a discount of $119. As part of the
Mutual Release and Waiver Agreement, the Company waived any right to future
commission payments from Burk. Additionally, Burk and the Company
granted mutual releases to one another with respect to future claims and
liabilities. Accordingly, the total pre-tax gain on the disposal of
discontinued operations, related to Burk, was approximately $2,419.
Ken-A-Vision
In August
2006, the Company sold its document and educational camera product line to
Ken-A-Vision Manufacturing Co. Inc., a privately held manufacturer of camera
solutions for education, audio visual, research, and manufacturing applications.
Under the terms of the transaction, Ken-A-Vision received the intellectual
property rights to ClearOne's camera technologies, as well as ownership of
current inventory. The sale price was $635, payable in cash and a $318 note
receivable payable over 24 months. As of June 30, 2008, the Company has received
all amounts due to date under the receivable.
Net
assets of discontinued operations at June 30, 2006 consisted of the
following:
|
|
Year Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory
|
|
$ |
411 |
|
Patents,
net
|
|
|
154 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
$ |
565 |
|
Summary
operating results for the years ended June 30, 2008, 2007, and 2006 are as
follows:
|
|
Year Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
648 |
|
|
$ |
2,269 |
|
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
573 |
|
|
|
1,908 |
|
Gross
profit
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
361 |
|
Loss
on disposal
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Provision
for income taxes
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(135 |
) |
Income
from discontinued operations
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
42 |
|
|
$ |
226 |
|
4. Inventories
Inventories,
net of reserves, consist of the following as of June 30, 2008 and
2007:
|
|
As of June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Raw
materials
|
|
$ |
724 |
|
|
$ |
453 |
|
Finished
goods
|
|
|
5,356 |
|
|
|
4,695 |
|
Consigned
inventory
|
|
|
1,719 |
|
|
|
2,115 |
|
Total
inventory
|
|
$ |
7,799 |
|
|
$ |
7,263 |
|
Consigned
inventory represents inventory at distributors and other customers where revenue
recognition criteria have not been achieved.
5. Note
Receivable
As of
June 30, 2008, the Company held a note receivable with Ken-A-Vision which had a
balance of $43 related to the sale of the document and educational camera
product line. The note receivable is payable over 24 months, with an
interest rate of 8.0% and a maturity date of September 2008. As of June 30,
2008, the Company had received all amounts due to date under the note
receivable.
6. Property and
Equipment
Major
classifications of property and equipment and estimated useful lives are as
follows as of June 30, 2008 and 2007:
|
Estimated
|
|
As of June 30,
|
|
|
useful lives
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Office
furniture and equipment
|
3
to 10 years
|
|
$ |
8,197 |
|
|
$ |
7,825 |
|
Leasehold
improvements
|
1
to 6 years
|
|
|
1,309 |
|
|
|
1,289 |
|
Manufacturing
and test equipment
|
2
to 10 years
|
|
|
1,532 |
|
|
|
1,433 |
|
|
|
|
|
11,038 |
|
|
|
10,547 |
|
Accumulated
depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
|
(8,484 |
) |
|
|
(7,853 |
) |
Property
and equipment, net
|
|
|
$ |
2,554 |
|
|
$ |
2,694 |
|
7.
Investments
The
following table displays the gross unrealized losses and fair value of the
Company’s investments with unrealized losses that are not deemed to be
other-than-temporarily impaired (in thousands) inclusive of the length of time
the securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position at June 30,
2008:
Description
of Securities
|
|
Total
- All Less than 12 Months
|
|
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
|
Unrealized
Losses
|
|
Marketable
Securities
|
|
$ |
17,090 |
|
|
$ |
1,107 |
|
As
of June 30, 2008, $12,225 of the Company’s investments (at cost) were
invested in auction rate securities ("ARSs"). Recently, auctions for
these securities were not successful, resulting in the Company continuing to
hold these securities and the issuers paying interest at the maximum contractual
rate. Based on current credit market
conditions,
it is likely that future auctions related to these securities will be
unsuccessful in the near term. Unsuccessful auctions will result in the Company
holding securities beyond their next scheduled auction reset dates and limiting
the short-term liquidity of these investments.
While
these failures in the auction process have affected the Company’s ability to
access these funds in the near term, the Company does not believe that the
long-term value of the underlying securities or collateral have been affected.
The Company’s ARSs are held at two different investment banks: UBS and Morgan
Stanley. All but one of the ARS investments are AAA and/or Aaa rated. The other
ARS is A2/A rated. Due to the current market conditions, the Company has
evaluated the accounting treatment of its ARS investments. In its evaluation,
the Company has reviewed SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in
Debt and Equity Securities and related guidance issued by the FASB and the
Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).
During
the fiscal third quarter of 2008, the Company reclassified its entire ARS
investment balance from short-term/current investments to long-term/non-current
auction rate securities on its balance sheet due to the Company’s inability to
determine when its ARS investments will become liquid. The Company also
determined there was a decline in the fair value of its ARS investments of
$1,057 which was deemed temporary. The Company deemed this decline temporary in
accordance with SFAS No. 115,
Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, and
related guidance issued by FASB and the SEC which calls for the classification
of impairments as “temporary” or “other-than-temporary.” A temporary impairment
charge results in an unrealized loss being recorded in the other comprehensive
income (loss) component of stockholders’ equity. Such an unrealized loss does
not affect net income (loss) for the applicable reporting period. An
other-than-temporary impairment charge is recorded as a recognized loss in the
consolidated statement of operations and reduces net income (loss) for the
applicable reporting period. The differentiating factors between temporary and
other-than-temporary impairment are primarily the length of the time and the
extent to which the market value has been less than cost, the financial
condition and near-term prospects of the issuer and the intent and ability of
the Company to retain its investment with the issuer for a period of time
sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in market value. The Company,
with its current knowledge, has the ability to hold the ARSs as long as required
to realize the full par value which could be until final maturity of the
underlying notes (between 2027 and 2039). Therefore since the Company believes
it is probable that it will be able to collect all amounts due according to the
contractual terms of the investment, the impairment has been deemed to be not
other-than-temporary. From a UBS derived pricing model, it has reduced the value
of the Company’s ARSs on its June 30, 2008 statement by approximately $1,057
from the par value.
The
Company was advised by UBS that the following variables were used in UBS’s
pricing model: (1) type of auction security; (2) security rating; (3) insurance
(if any) ; (4) collateral (if any); (5) taxable vs. tax-exempt; (6) estimated
duration; (7) nature of the maximum rate formula (e.g. an issuer with a less
favorable maximum rate formula would be more likely to refinance); and (8)
likelihood of redemption. The Company’s assessment of a fair value of all but
one of its ARSs at June 30, 2008 conformed to UBS’s statement of current value. The Company
chose to follow UBS’s current
value after determining that using its own discounted cash flow method
with the following major assumptions: (1) three month T-Bill plus 120 basis
points (generally the minimum rate of annualized interest required by the ARS
issuers) and (2) a term of five years (the estimated duration to reach full
liquidity), derived a valuation within one percent of UBS’s valuation. One ARS
was stated at par value on June 30, 2008 as it has experienced recent partial
redemption, albeit minimal.
Changes
in the unrealized holding losses on the Company’s marketable securities and
reported as a separate component of accumulated other comprehensive income are
as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Year
ending June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Balance,
beginning of year
|
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Unrealized
holding (losses), in marketable securities (before taxes)
|
|
|
(1,107 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Income
tax benefit
|
|
|
413 |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance,
end of year
|
|
$ |
(694 |
) |
|
$ |
- |
|
The
components of comprehensive income (loss) are (in thousands):
|
|
Year ending June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
5,656 |
|
|
$ |
5,209 |
|
Other
comprehensive income (loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
gain (loss) on available-for-sale investment
|
|
|
(1,107 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
Income
tax benefit
|
|
|
413 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
$ |
4,962 |
|
|
$ |
5,209 |
|
9.
Leases and Deferred Rent
Certain
operating leases contain rent escalation clauses based on the consumer price
index. Rental expense is recognized on a straight-line
basis. Rental expense, which was composed of minimum payments under
operating lease obligations, was $569, $595 and $416 for the years ended June
30, 2008, 2007, and 2006, respectively.
On June
5, 2006, the Company entered into a 62-month lease for its new principal
administrative, sales, marketing, customer support, and research and development
location which houses its corporate headquarters in Salt Lake City,
Utah. Under the terms of the lease, the Company occupies a 36,279
square-foot facility which commenced in November 2006. The lease agreement
provided that the lessor would provide approximately $1,088 for leasehold
improvements. This amount was recorded as deferred rent and is being
amortized to lease expense over the term of the lease. During the
year ended June 30, 2007, the Company completed leasehold improvements in excess
of the amounts paid by the lessor. These amounts are being
depreciated over the life of the lease.
Additionally,
pursuant to the Company’s warehouse lease agreement dated September 20, 2006,
the Company modified the terms generally providing that effective March 31,
2008, the Company would lease approximately 6,000 square feet for $3 per month
which expires in December 2011 and is used by the Company as a repair facility
and document and equipment storage.
Finally,
the Company leases an approximate 2,000 square-foot warehouse for $2 per month
in Hong Kong which expires in February 2010 and supports our partners and
customers located in the Asia-Pacific region.
Future
minimum lease payments under noncancelable operating leases with initial terms
of one year or more are as follows as of June 30, 2008:
|
|
Years Ending
June 30,
|
|
2009
|
|
$ |
701 |
|
2010
|
|
|
695 |
|
2011
|
|
|
682 |
|
2012
|
|
|
663 |
|
2013
|
|
|
644 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
1,023 |
|
Total
minimum lease payments
|
|
$ |
4,408 |
|
10. Accrued
Liabilities
Accrued
liabilities consist of the following as of June 30, 2008 and 2007:
|
|
As of June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Accrued
salaries and other compensation
|
|
$ |
974 |
|
|
$ |
1,027 |
|
Other
accrued liabilities
|
|
|
2,626 |
|
|
|
847 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
3,600 |
|
|
$ |
1,874 |
|
Included
in other accrued liabilities in June 30, 2008, is $1,458 which represents the
probable amount that as of the date of the financial statements could be
reasonably estimated of the Company’s liability, through trial, associated with
the advancement of funds related to the indemnification agreements with two
former officers (see Note 11 - Former Officer
Indemnification).
11.
Commitments and Contingencies
The
Company establishes contingent liabilities when a particular contingency is both
probable and estimable. For the contingencies noted below the Company
has accrued amounts considered probable and estimable. The Company is
not aware of pending claims or assessments, other than as described below, which
may have a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial position or
results of operations.
Outsource
Manufacturers. The Company has manufacturing agreements with
manufacturers related to the outsourced manufacturing of its
products. Certain manufacturing agreements establish annual volume
commitments. The Company is also obligated to repurchase Company-forecasted but
unused materials. The Company has accounted for its current outsourced
manufacturing commitments and contingencies as a component of inventory and
established a reserve for inventory obsolescence for inventory which is probable
to be written off in the future. The Company has non-cancellable,
non-returnable, and long-lead time commitments with its outsourced manufacturers
and certain suppliers for inventory components that will be used in production.
The Company’s exposure associated with these commitments is approximately $1.3
million
Legal
Proceedings. In addition to the legal proceedings described
below, the Company is also involved from time to time in various claims and
other legal proceedings which arise in the normal course of business. Such
matters are subject to many uncertainties and outcomes that are not predictable.
However, based on the information currently available to the Company and after
discussions with legal counsel, the Company does not believe any such other
proceedings will have a material, adverse effect on its business, results of
operations, financial position, or liquidity, except as described
below.
Former Officer
Indemnification. On July 25, 2007, the U.S. Attorney’s Office
for the District of Utah indicted two of our former officers, Frances Flood and
Susie Strohm, for allegedly causing us to issue materially misstated financial
statements for our 2001 and 2002 fiscal years. On January 31, 2008,
the U.S. Attorney’s Office filed a Second Superseding Indictment further
alleging perjury in connection with the prior investigation by the SEC into the
alleged misstatements. We are cooperating fully with the U.S.
Attorney’s Office in this matter and have been advised that we are neither a
target nor a subject of the investigation or indictment. In December
2003, ClearOne entered into indemnification agreements with each former officer,
requiring payment of all reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred in
defending against the charges in certain circumstances consistent with and
subject to limitations under applicable law. To date, we have paid
approximately $1.8 million in reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to defend
against the charges. As of August 21, 2008, these former officers have requested
advancement of an additional $365,000 in legal fees and costs incurred as of
that date, which amounts we have not paid. On August 21, 2008, Ms.
Strohm and her counsel filed a lawsuit in the Third Judicial District Court in
Salt Lake City, Utah seeking a declaratory judgment and injunctive relief to
compel us to continue to advance Ms. Strohm’s attorney’s fees and costs to
defend against the charges, plus interest for amounts previously requested and
not paid. Also on August 21, 2008, Ms. Flood filed a lawsuit in
Federal District Court for the District of Utah, seeking similar relief. A trial
date has been set for October 20, 2008 although we were informed on August 29,
2008 that the attorney’s representing the former officers filed a joint motion
to continue the trial.
We have
accrued for legal fees and costs of the probable amount the Company was able to
estimate of its contingent liability under the indemnification agreements at
June 30, 2008. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 5, “Accounting for Contingencies”, we have accrued a total of $3.3
million, the balance of which was about $1.5 million at June 30, 2008
representing the probable amount that, as of the date of the financial
statements, could be reasonably estimated of our contingent liability, through
trial, under the indemnification agreements if required under applicable
law. The accrual is management’s best estimate of our contingent
liability as of the date of the issuance of its financial
statements. In accordance with SFAS No. 5, we will adjust our
contingent liability, as necessary, to reflect the probable amount that can be
reasonably estimated. Our actual liability may be higher or lower
than management’s estimate upon final resolution of the matter. We
will adjust our contingent liability, as needed, so that it remains an estimable
and probable amount of our contingent financial liability as of the date of
issuance of the applicable financial statements.
Theft of Trade Secret
Action. In
January 2007 the Company filed a lawsuit in the Third Judicial District Court,
Salt Lake County, State of Utah against WideBand Solutions, Inc., Biamp Systems
Corporation, Inc., and two individuals; one a former employee and one previously
affiliated with ClearOne. The Complaint brings claims against
different combinations of the defendants for, among other things,
misappropriation of certain trade secrets, breach of contract, conversion,
unjust enrichment and intentional interference with business and contractual
relations.
The Shareholder Derivative Actions.
Between March and August 2003, four shareholder derivative actions
were filed in the Third Judicial District Court of Salt Lake County, State of
Utah, by certain shareholders of the Company against various present and past
officers and directors of the Company and against Ernst &
Young. The complaints asserted allegations similar to those asserted
in the SEC complaint that was filed on January 15, 2003 with regard to alleged
improper revenue recognition practices and the shareholders’ class action that
was filed on June 30, 2003 and also alleged that the defendant directors and
officers violated their fiduciary duties to the Company by causing or allowing
the Company to recognize revenue in violation of U.S. GAAP and to issue
materially misstated financial statements and that Ernst & Young breached
its professional responsibilities to the Company and acted in violation of U.S.
GAAP and generally accepted auditing standards by failing to identify or prevent
the alleged revenue recognition violations and by issuing unqualified audit
opinions with respect to the Company’s fiscal 2002 and 2001 financial
statements. One of these actions was dismissed without prejudice on
June 13, 2003. As to the other three actions, our Board of
Directors appointed a special litigation committee of independent directors to
evaluate the claims. That committee determined that the maintenance
of the derivative proceedings against the individual defendants was not in the
best interest of the Company. Accordingly, on December 12, 2003, we moved to
dismiss those claims. In March 2004, our motions were granted,
and the derivative claims were dismissed with prejudice as to all defendants
except Ernst & Young. The Company was substituted as the plaintiff in the
action and is now pursuing in its own name the claims against Ernst & Young.
The dates of the arbitration case management have been scheduled including
commencement of the hearing on April 20, 2009.
The Insurance Coverage
Action. On February 9,
2004, ClearOne and Edward Dallin Bagley (“Bagley”), a former director and
significant shareholder of ClearOne, jointly filed an action in the United
States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division, against
National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (“National
Union”) and Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company (“Lumbermens Mutual”), the
carriers of certain prior period directors and officers’ liability insurance
policies, to recover the costs of defending and resolving claims against certain
of our present and former directors and officers in connection with the SEC
complaint filed on January 15, 2003, the shareholders’ class action filed on
June 30, 2003, and the shareholder derivative actions described above, and
seeking other damages resulting from the refusal of such carriers to timely pay
the amounts owing under such liability insurance policies. This
action has been consolidated into a declaratory relief action filed by one of
the insurance carriers on February 6, 2004 against ClearOne and certain of
its current and former directors. In this action, the insurers assert
that they are entitled to rescind insurance coverage under our directors and
officers’ liability insurance policies, $3.0 million of which was provided by
National Union and $2.0 million which was provided by Lumbermens Mutual, based
on alleged misstatements in our insurance applications. In February
2005, we entered into a confidential settlement agreement with Lumbermens Mutual
pursuant to which ClearOne and Bagley received a lump-sum cash amount and the
plaintiffs agreed to dismiss their claims against Lumbermens Mutual with
prejudice. The cash settlement is being held in a segregated account
until the claims involving National Union have been resolved, at which time the
amounts received in the action will be allocated between the Company and
Bagley. The amount distributed to us and Bagley will be determined
based on future negotiations between us and Bagley. We cannot
currently estimate the amount of the settlement which it will ultimately
receive. Upon determining the amount of the settlement which we will
ultimately receive, we will record this as a contingent gain. During
October 2005, the court granted summary judgment in favor of National Union on
its rescission defense and accordingly entered a judgment dismissing all of the
claims asserted by ClearOne and Mr. Bagley. In connection with the
summary judgment, we have been ordered to pay approximately $59,000 in
costs. However, due to the Lumbermens Mutual cash proceeds discussed
above and the appeal of the summary judgment ruling discussed below, this
potential liability has not been recorded in the balance sheet as of June 30,
2008. On February 2, 2006, we and Mr. Bagley appealed the summary
judgment ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, and on July
25, 2007, the Tenth Circuit issued its decision reversing the summary judgment
as to ClearOne’s claims but affirming it as to Bagley’s claims. The
case has been remanded back to the district court for trial on ClearOne’s claims
for breach of contract and for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and
fair dealing and on National Union’s defenses, including its rescission
defense. No assurances can be given that we will prevail at
trial. We and Bagley have entered into a Joint Prosecution and
Defense Agreement in connection with the action under which we are obligated to
pay all litigation expenses in the case except those which are solely related to
Bagley’s claims.
Indemnification of Officers and
Directors. The Company’s by-laws and the Utah Revised Business
Corporation Act provide for indemnification of directors and officers against
reasonable expenses incurred by such persons in connection with civil or
criminal actions or proceedings to which they have been made parties because
they are or were directors or officers of the Company or its subsidiaries.
Indemnification is permitted if the person satisfies the required standards of
conduct. Certain of the litigation matters described above involved certain of
the Company’s current and former directors and officers, all of whom are covered
by the aforementioned indemnity and if applicable, certain prior period
insurance policies. The Company has advanced and/or indemnified such persons for
legal expenses incurred by them in such actions, and in accordance with the
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 5, “Accounting for
Contingencies” (SFAS No. 5) accrued for amounts which were probable and
estimable as of the date of the financial statements. As discussed above, the
Company has sought reimbursement from its insurance carriers in certain cases.
However, as also discussed above, the Company cannot predict with certainty the
extent to which the Company will recover the indemnification payments from its
insurers.
The
Company believes it is adequately accrued for the aforementioned contingent
liabilities.
12.
Shareholders' Equity
Private
Placement
On
December 11, 2001, the Company closed a private placement of 1,500,000 shares of
common stock. Gross proceeds from the private placement were $25,500,
before costs and expenses associated with this transaction, which totaled
$1,665. In connection with this private placement, the Company issued
warrants to purchase 150,000 shares of its common stock at $17.00 per share to
its financial advisor. Such warrants vested immediately and were
valued at $1,556 using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the following
assumptions: expected dividend yield of 0 percent, risk-free interest
rate of 4.4 percent, expected price volatility of 68.0 percent, and contractual
life of five years. The warrants expired on November 27,
2006.
Stock
Buy-Back Program
On August
30, 2007, the Company announced that its Board of Directors had approved a stock
buy-back program to purchase up $3,625 of the Company’s common stock over a 12
month period in open market and private block transactions. On May 1, 2008 the
Company announced that its Board of Directors authorized the purchase of up to
an additional $1 million of the Company’s common stock. Each of these approved
share repurchase programs have expired. In conjunction with these stock buy-back
programs, the Company repurchased 835,000 shares for approximately $4,300. All
repurchased shares were immediately retired.
13.
Share-Based Payment
The
Company’s share-based compensation primarily consists of the following
plans:
On June
30, 2008, the Company had two share-based compensation plans, one which was
replaced on November 20, 2007, and one which became active on the same date. The
plans are described below.
The
Company’s 1998 Incentive Plan (the “1998 Plan”) had shares of common stock
available for issuance to employees and directors. Provisions of the 1998 Plan
included the granting of stock options. Provisions of the 1998 Plan
include the granting of incentive and non-qualified stock
options. Through December 1999, 1,066,000 options were granted that
would cliff vest after 9.8 years; however, such vesting was accelerated for
637,089 of these options upon meeting certain earnings per share goals through
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. Subsequent to December 1999 and
through June 2002, 1,248,250 options were granted that would cliff vest after
6.0 years; however, such vesting was accelerated for 300,494 of these options
upon meeting certain earnings per share goals through the fiscal year ended June
30, 2005. As of June 30, 2008, 20,000 and 125,250 of these options
that cliff vest after 9.8 and 6.0 years, respectively, remain
outstanding.
The
Company also has a 2007 Equity Incentive Plan (the “2007 Plan”). Provisions of
the 2007 Plan include the granting of up to 1,000,000 incentive and
non-qualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock and
restricted stock units. Options may be granted to employees, officers,
non-employee directors and other service providers and may be granted upon such
terms as the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, in their sole
discretion, determine, or in the absence of a Compensation Committee, a properly
constituted Compensation Committee or the Board itself.
Of the
options granted subsequent to June 2002, all vesting schedules are based on 3 or
4-year vesting schedules, with either one-third or one-fourth vesting on the
first anniversary and the remaining options vesting ratably over the remainder
of the vesting term. Generally, directors and officers have 3-year vesting
schedules and all other employees have 4-year vesting schedules. Additionally,
in the event of a change in control or the occurrence of a corporate
transaction, the Company’s Board of Directors have the authority to elect that
all unvested options shall vest and become exercisable immediately prior to the
event or closing of the transaction. All options outstanding as of June 30, 2008
had contractual lives of ten years. Under the 1998 Plan, 2,500,000 shares were
authorized for grant. As of June 30, 2008, there were 1,195,046 options
outstanding under the 1998 Plan, which includes the cliff vesting and 3 or
4-year vesting options discussed above. As of June 30, 2008 there were 4,000
options outstanding under the 2007 Plan.
The
Company also has an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”). Employees
can purchase common stock through payroll deductions of up to 10 percent of
their base pay. Amounts deducted and accumulated by the employees are
used to purchase shares of common stock on or about the first day of each
month. The Company contributes to the account of the employee one
share of common stock for every nine shares purchased by the employee under the
ESPP.
The
Company uses judgment in determining the fair value of the share-based payments
on the date of grant using an option-pricing model with assumptions regarding a
number of highly complex and subjective variables. These variables
include, but are not limited to, the risk-free interest rate of the awards, the
expected life of the awards, the expected volatility over the term of the
awards, the expected dividends of the awards, and an estimate of the amount of
awards that are expected to be forfeited. The Company uses the
Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the fair value of share-based
payments granted under SFAS No. 123R and the original SFAS No. 123.
In
applying the Black-Scholes methodology to the options granted during the fiscal
years ended June 30, 2008, 2007, and 2006, the Company used the following
assumptions:
|
Fiscal Year Ended
|
|
June 30,
|
June 30,
|
June 30,
|
|
2008
|
2007
|
2006
|
Risk-free
interest rate, average
|
4.5%
|
4.8%
|
4.4%
|
Expected
option life, average
|
4.3
years
|
4.6
years
|
5.9
years
|
Expected
price volatility, average
|
73.9%
|
88.3%
|
87.2%
|
Expected
dividend yield
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
0.0%
|
Expected
annual forfeiture rate
|
10.0%
|
10.0%
|
10.0%
|
The
risk-free interest rate is determined using the U.S. Treasury rate in effect as
of the date of the grant, based on the expected life of the stock
option. The expected life of the stock option is determined using
historical data. The expected price volatility is determined using a
weighted average of daily historical volatility of the Company’s stock price
over the corresponding expected option life. The Company does not
currently intend to distribute any dividend payments to
shareholders. Under SFAS No. 123R, the Company recognizes
compensation cost net of an expected forfeiture rate and recognized the
associated compensation cost for only those awards expected to vest on a
straight-line basis over the underlying requisite service period. The
Company estimated the forfeiture rates based on its historical experience and
expectations about future forfeitures. The Company determined the
annual forfeiture rate for options that will cliff vest after 9.8 or 6.0 years
to be 38.0 percent and the annual forfeiture rate for options that vest on 3 or
4 year vesting schedules to be 10.0 percent.
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006, the adoption of SFAS No. 123R resulted in
incremental, pre-tax, stock-based compensation cost of $1,100. For
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006, the Company expensed $49 in cost of goods
sold, $99 in sales and marketing, $203 in research and product development
expense, $756 in general and administrative, and $34 in other income (expense)
related to the transition to SFAS No. 123R. The stock-based
compensation cost associated with adoption of SFAS No. 123R increased net
operating loss for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006 by $1,107, decreased net
income by $877, and reduced basic and diluted earnings per share by $0.07 per
share. The total income tax provision (benefit) related to
share-based compensation for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006 was ($264) and
is shown as a cash flow from operating activities in our cash flow
statement.
|
|
Year Ended June 30, 2006
|
|
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SFAS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No.
123R
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Compensation
|
|
|
|
As Reported
|
|
|
Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
35,362 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
|
17,375 |
|
|
|
(49 |
) |
Gross
profit
|
|
|
17,987 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
Operating
expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
and marketing
|
|
|
7,866 |
|
|
|
(99 |
) |
Research
and product development
|
|
|
8,299 |
|
|
|
(203 |
) |
General
and administrative
|
|
|
5,108 |
|
|
|
(756 |
) |
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
|
|
(1,205 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
Total
operating expenses
|
|
|
20,068 |
|
|
|
(1,058 |
) |
Operating
loss
|
|
|
(2,081 |
) |
|
|
1,107 |
|
Other
income, net
|
|
|
1,016 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(1,065 |
) |
|
|
1,141 |
|
Benefit
for income taxes
|
|
|
1,005 |
|
|
|
(264 |
) |
Income
from continuing operations
|
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
877 |
|
Income
from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
|
|
2,156 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net
income
|
|
$ |
2,096 |
|
|
$ |
877 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
earnings (loss) per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
(0.01 |
) |
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
0.18 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
0.18 |
|
|
|
0.07 |
|
Diluted
earnings (loss) per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing
operations
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
0.18 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Net
income
|
|
|
0.17 |
|
|
|
0.07 |
|
The
following table shows the stock option activity for the fiscal years ended June
30, 2008, 2007 and 2006.
Stock Options
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
Weighted Average Exercise
Price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
at June 30, 2005
|
|
|
1,493,112 |
|
|
|
6.21 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
29,000 |
|
|
|
2.63 |
|
Expired
and canceled
|
|
|
(118,353 |
) |
|
|
3.55 |
|
Forfeited
prior to vesting
|
|
|
(165,839 |
) |
|
|
8.11 |
|
Exercised
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Outstanding
at June 30, 2006
|
|
|
1,237,920 |
|
|
|
6.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
436,500 |
|
|
|
3.84 |
|
Expired
and canceled
|
|
|
(329,316 |
) |
|
|
6.45 |
|
Forfeited
prior to vesting
|
|
|
(55,965 |
) |
|
|
3.94 |
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(15,940 |
) |
|
|
3.41 |
|
Outstanding
at June 30, 2007
|
|
|
1,273,199 |
|
|
|
5.38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
319,000 |
|
|
|
6.13 |
|
Expired
and canceled
|
|
|
(68,058 |
) |
|
|
7.39 |
|
Forfeited
prior to vesting
|
|
|
(96,727 |
) |
|
|
5.23 |
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(228,368 |
) |
|
|
3.47 |
|
Outstanding
at June 30, 2008
|
|
|
1,199,046 |
|
|
|
5.85 |
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
747,736 |
|
|
|
6.07 |
|
The
following table summarizes information about stock options outstanding as of
June 30, 2008:
|
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
Exercise Price Range
|
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
Weighted Average Exercise
Price
|
|
Weighted Average Contractual Term
(Years)
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
|
Weighted Average Exercise
Price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$0.00
to $4.00
|
|
|
|
486,442 |
|
|
$ |
3.45 |
|
7.0
years
|
|
|
352,442 |
|
|
$ |
3.41 |
|
|
$4.01
to $8.00 |
|
|
|
572,354 |
|
|
|
5.99 |
|
7.6
years
|
|
|
268,470 |
|
|
|
5.98 |
|
|
$8.01
to $12.00 |
|
|
|
52,500 |
|
|
|
11.83 |
|
2.1
years
|
|
|
51,688 |
|
|
|
11.86 |
|
|
$12.01
to $16.00 |
|
|
|
87,000 |
|
|
|
14.64 |
|
1.8
years
|
|
|
74,713 |
|
|
|
14.87 |
|
|
$16.01
to $20.00 |
|
|
|
750 |
|
|
|
18.80 |
|
1.8
years
|
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
19.13 |
|
Total
|
|
|
|
1,199,046 |
|
|
$ |
5.85 |
|
6.7
years
|
|
|
747,736 |
|
|
$ |
6.07 |
|
The
following table summarized information about non-vesting stock options
outstanding as of June 30, 2008:
Non-vested Shares
|
|
Number of Shares
|
|
|
Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair
Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-vested
at June 30, 2007
|
|
|
478,654 |
|
|
$ |
2.87 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
319,000 |
|
|
|
3.69 |
|
Vested
|
|
|
(249,617 |
) |
|
|
2.68 |
|
Forfeited
prior to vesting
|
|
|
(96,727 |
) |
|
|
3.38 |
|
Non-vested
at June 30, 2008
|
|
|
451,310 |
|
|
$ |
3.44 |
|
As of
June 30, 2008, the total compensation cost related to stock options not yet
recognized and before the affect of any forfeitures was $1,016, which is
expected to be recognized over approximately the next 3 years on a straight-line
basis.
The
weighted-average estimated grant date fair value of the stock options granted
during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2008, 2007, and 2006 was $3.69, $2.65 and
$1.96 per share, respectively.
Due to
the Company’s failure to remain current in its filing of periodic reports with
the SEC during fiscal 2005, and most of 2006, employees, executive officers, and
directors were not allowed to exercise options under the 1998 Plan. Since
December 2003, individual grants that had been affected by this situation were
modified to extend the exercise period of the option through the date the
Company became current in its filings with the SEC and options again become
exercisable. Since July 1, 2003, modifications of stock option grants
include (i) the extension of the post-service exercise period of vested options
held by persons who have ceased to remain employed by the Company; (ii) the
extension of the option exercise period for maturing options that were fully
vested and unexercised; (iii) the acceleration of vesting schedule for certain
key employees whose employment terminated due to the sale of the conferencing
services business to Premiere; and (iv) the acceleration of vesting schedule for
one former officer at termination. For the fiscal year ended June 30,
2006, the Company modified stock options related to 8
employees. Compensation cost is recognized immediately for options
that are fully vested on the date of modification. During the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2006, the Company expensed $16, in compensation cost
associated with these modifications. The $16 of costs associated with
modifications in fiscal 2006 are included in the $1,141 of SFAS No. 123R
compensation expense disclosed above for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006.
The Company did not modify any stock options for the 2007 or 2008 fiscal
years.
14.
Significant Customers
Sales to
significant customers that represented more than 10 percent of total revenues
for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2008, 2007, and 2006 are as
follows:
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Customer
A
|
|
|
31.0% |
|
|
|
30.4% |
|
|
|
24.6% |
|
Customer
B
|
|
|
14.4% |
|
|
|
13.4% |
|
|
|
16.6% |
|
Customer
C
|
|
|
14.4% |
|
|
|
12.8% |
|
|
|
15.0% |
|
Total
|
|
|
59.8% |
|
|
|
56.6% |
|
|
|
56.2% |
|
The
following table summarizes the percentage of total gross accounts receivable for
the fiscal years ended June 30, 2008 and 2007:
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
Customer
A
|
|
|
22.5% |
|
|
|
29.3% |
|
Customer
B
|
|
|
15.3% |
|
|
|
16.7% |
|
Customer
C
|
|
|
12.3% |
|
|
|
12.2% |
|
Total
|
|
|
50.1% |
|
|
|
58.2% |
|
These
customers facilitate product sales to a large number of end-users, none of which
is known to account for more than 10 percent of the Company’s revenue from
product sales. Nevertheless, the loss of one or more of these
customers could reduce revenues and have a material adverse effect on the
Company’s business and results of operations.
15. Severance
Charges
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2006, the Company entered into a settlement
agreement and release with its former Vice-President in connection with the
cessation of her employment, which generally provided for her resignation from
her position and employment with the Company, the payment of severance, and a
general release of claims against the Company by her. On February 20,
2006, an agreement was entered into which generally provided for a severance
payment of $93 and her surrender and delivery to the Company of 145,000 stock
options (86,853 of which were vested).
During
the fiscal year ending June 30, 2007, the Company entered into a settlement
agreement and release with its former Vice-President in connection with the
cessation of his employment, which generally provided for his resignation from
his position and employment with the Company, the payment of severance in the
amount of $14, net of applicable taxes and a general release of claims against
the Company by him.
During
the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008, the Company entered into a compromise
agreement and release with its former Managing Director of ClearOne
Communications, Ltd in connection with the cessation of his employment, which
generally provided for this resignation from his position and employment with
the Company, the payment of remuneration of approximately $94 representing six
months’ notice, $10 for accrued but unused holiday pay, $32 severance, and a
general release of claims against the Company by him.
16. Retirement
Savings and Profit Sharing Plan
The
Company has a 401(k) retirement savings and profit sharing plan to which it
makes discretionary matching contributions, as authorized by the Board of
Directors. All full-time employees who are at least 21 years of age
and have a minimum of sixty days of service with the Company are eligible to
participate in the plan. The Company’s contribution is determined
annually by the board of directors. The Company’s retirement plan
contribution expense for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2008, 2007, and 2006
totaled $108, $77 and $61, respectively.
17. Income
Taxes
Income
(loss) from continuing operations before income taxes consisted of the
following:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
$ |
3,033 |
|
|
$ |
5,184 |
|
|
$ |
(1,113 |
) |
Non-U.S.
|
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
$ |
2,884 |
|
|
$ |
5,244 |
|
|
$ |
(1,065 |
) |
The
benefit (provision) for income taxes on income from continuing operations
consisted of the following:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Federal
|
|
$ |
(1,395 |
) |
|
$ |
(435 |
) |
|
$ |
889 |
|
U.S.
State
|
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
118 |
|
Non-U.S.
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Total
current
|
|
$ |
(1,456 |
) |
|
$ |
(457 |
) |
|
$ |
1,005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
Federal
|
|
|
3,368 |
|
|
|
(148 |
) |
|
|
(619 |
) |
U.S.
State
|
|
|
844 |
|
|
|
(594 |
) |
|
|
73 |
|
Change
in deferred before valuation allowance
|
|
|
4,212 |
|
|
|
(742 |
) |
|
|
(546 |
) |
Decrease
(increase) in valuation allowance
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
742 |
|
|
|
546 |
|
Total
deferred
|
|
|
4,212 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Provision)
benefit for income taxes
|
|
$ |
2,756 |
|
|
$ |
(457 |
) |
|
$ |
1,005 |
|
The
following table presents the principal reasons for the difference between the
actual effective income tax rate and the expected U.S. federal statutory income
tax rate of 34.0 percent on income from continuing operations:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
federal statutory income tax rate at 34.0 percent
|
|
$ |
(989 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,782 |
) |
|
$ |
362 |
|
State
income tax (provision) benefit, net of federal income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tax
effect
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
79 |
|
Repatriated
foreign earnings
|
|
|
(308 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Foreign
tax credit
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Non-deductible
SFAS No. 123R compensation expense
|
|
|
(106 |
) |
|
|
(122 |
) |
|
|
(143 |
) |
Research
and development credit
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
329 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
Foreign
earnings or losses taxed at different rates
|
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
14 |
|
Uncertain
tax positions
|
|
|
(295 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Non-deductible
items and other
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
496 |
|
|
|
180 |
|
Change
in valuation allowance
|
|
|
3,680 |
|
|
|
637 |
|
|
|
441 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax
(provision) benefit
|
|
$ |
2,756 |
|
|
$ |
(457 |
) |
|
$ |
1,005 |
|
Deferred
income taxes are determined based on the differences between the financial
reporting and income tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted income
tax rates expected to apply when the differences are expected to be settled or
realized. As of June 30, 2008 and 2007, significant components of the
net U.S. deferred income tax assets and (liabilities) were as
follows:
|
|
2008
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Long-term
|
|
Current
|
|
|
Long-term
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
revenue
|
|
$ |
1,103 |
|
|
$ |
|
$ |
1,075 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Basis
difference in intangible assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
599 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
676 |
|
Inventory
reserve
|
|
|
815 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
870 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net
operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
115 |
|
Accumulated
research and development credits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
341 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
960 |
|
Alternative
minimum tax credits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
287 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
409 |
|
Accrued
liabilities
|
|
|
1,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
|
|
Deductible
SFAS 123R compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
513 |
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance
for sales returns and doubtful accounts
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
|
|
State
income taxes
|
|
|
(228 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Uncertain
tax positions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(155 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Difference
in property and equipment basis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(324 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
(254 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
414 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
net deferred income tax asset
|
|
|
2,828 |
|
|
|
1,639 |
|
|
2,644 |
|
|
|
1,983 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less
valuation allowance
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
(2,644 |
) |
|
|
(1,983 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
deferred income tax asset
|
|
$ |
2,828 |
|
|
$ |
1,639 |
|
$ |
- |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Deferred
income tax assets and liabilities were netted by income tax jurisdiction and
were reported in the consolidated balance sheets as of June 30, 2008 and 2007,
as follows:
|
|
As of June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
deferred income tax assets
|
|
$ |
2,828 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
Long-term
deferred income tax assets
|
|
|
1,639 |
|
|
|
- |
|
Current
deferred income tax liabilities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
Long-term
deferred income tax liabilities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
Net
deferred income tax assets
|
|
$ |
4,467 |
|
|
$ |
- |
|
In
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes,
the Company’s analyzed its valuation allowance at June 30, 2008 and determined
that based upon available evidence it is more likely than not that all of its
deferred tax assets will be realized and as such reversed its previously
established valuation allowance.
As of
June 30, 2008, the Company had federal alternative minimum tax (“AMT”) credit
and capital loss carryforwards of $287 and $43, respectively, which have no
expiration date. As of June 30, 2008, the Company had state net
operating loss (“NOL”) and research credit carryforwards of approximately $210
and $341, respectively, which expire depending on the rules of the various
states to which the carryovers relate.
In July
2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Interpretation No.
48 (“FIN 48”), “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes,” which clarifies the
accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in the financial
statements in accordance with FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting for Income
Taxes. Under FIN 48, tax positions shall initially be recognized in the
financial statements when it is more likely than not the position will be
sustained upon examination by the tax authorities. Such tax positions shall
initially and subsequently be measured as the largest amount of tax benefit that
is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement with the
tax authority assuming full knowledge of the position and all relevant
facts.
The
Company adopted the provisions of FIN 48 on July 1, 2007. Upon
adoption, the Company recognized a FIN 48 liability of $755 for permanent tax
items. Included in the $755 liability was approximately $78 in interest and
penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits. The Company also recognized $159
of temporary FIN 48 liability. After taking its SFAS No. 5 “Accounting for
Contingencies” contingent liability balance of $618 from June 30, 2007 the
Company posted a cumulative-effect adjustment of approximately $295, increasing
our liability for unrecognized tax benefits and reducing the July 1, 2007
balance of retained earnings. The total liability for unrecognized tax benefits
at July 1, 2007, including temporary tax differences, was approximately $914.
During its fiscal 2008, the Company recorded approximately $299 related to
unrecognized tax benefits that would favorably impact its effective tax rate if
recognized. The total outstanding balance for liabilities related to
unrecognized tax benefits at June 30, 2008 was $1,209 of which $57 was
associated with interest and penalties. The Company account for interest expense
and penalties for unrecognized tax benefits as part of its income tax
provision.
A
reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of liabilities associated with
uncertain tax positions is as follows:
Unrecognized
tax benefits at July 1, 2007
|
|
$ |
862 |
|
Tax
positions taken in a prior period
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
increases
|
|
|
63 |
|
Gross
decreases
|
|
|
- |
|
Tax
positions taken in the current period
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
increases
|
|
|
419 |
|
Gross
decreases
|
|
|
- |
|
Settlements
with taxing authorities
|
|
|
- |
|
Lapse
of applicable statute of limitations
|
|
|
(192 |
) |
Unrecognized
tax benefits at June 30, 2008
|
|
$ |
1,152 |
|
As of
June 30, 2008 the Company had unrecognized tax benefits of approximately $1,209
(including interest and penalties of $57), of which $1,054 is recorded as a
current liability, which if recognized, would reduce the Company’s effective tax
rate. The remaining $155 is netted against the Company’s deferred tax assets
related to various temporary items. The Company does not reasonably estimate
that the unrecognized tax benefits will change significantly within the next
twelve months.
In
accordance with FIN 48, the Company has decided to classify interest and
penalties as a component of tax expense. Accrued interest and penalties at year
end were approximately $57.
The
Company’s U.S. federal income tax returns for 2004 through 2006 are open tax
years. The Company also files in various state and foreign jurisdictions. With
few exceptions, the Company is no longer subject to state or non-U.S. income tax
examinations by tax authorities for years prior to 2004.
18. Related-Party
Transactions
The
Company and Edward Dallin Bagley, former Chairman of the Board of Directors and
significant shareholder of the Company, jointly filed an action against National
Union and Lumbermens Mutual. For additional discussion see Note 11
under The Insurance Coverage
Action.
19. Geographic
Sales Information
The
United States was the only country to contribute more than 10 percent of total
revenues in each fiscal year. The Company’s revenues are
substantially denominated in U.S. dollars and are summarized geographically as
follows:
|
|
Years Ended June 30,
|
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United
States
|
|
$ |
27,826 |
|
|
$ |
28,336 |
|
|
$ |
25,316 |
|
All
other countries
|
|
|
11,926 |
|
|
|
11,525 |
|
|
|
10,046 |
|
Total
|
|
$ |
39,752 |
|
|
$ |
39,861 |
|
|
$ |
35,362 |
|
20. Subsequent
Events
On August
11, 2008 the Company announced that its Board of Directors had authorized a
tender offer to repurchase up to 2,000,000 of its shares at a price per share of
no less than $4.00 and no greater than $5.00 per share. The tender
offer commenced on August 18, 2008 and will expire 20 business days thereafter,
unless extended.
During
August 2008, the Company was advised that each of the two investment banks
holding its auction rate securities (“ARSs”), UBS and Morgan Stanley, had or
were close to reaching settlements with U.S. and state regulators. Included in
these settlements, UBS and Morgan Stanley would offer to repurchase, at par, the
Company’s ARSs. As of the date of the filing of this report, the Company has not
been advised of the date(s) of when its ARSs will be repurchased.
F-34