ACM Research, Inc. - Annual Report: 2017 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

☑ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017

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: 001-38273

ACM Research, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Delaware (State or Other Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization)		94-3290283 (I.R.S. Employee Identification No.)
42307 Osgood Road, Suite I, Fremont, California		94539
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)		(Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (510) 445-3700

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class		Name of each exchange on which registered
Class A Common Stock, $0.0001 par value per share		Nasdaq Global Market

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None.

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐  No ☑

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☑

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☑  No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data file required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☑ 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 this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ☐

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer ☐	Accelerated filer ☐
Non-accelerated file (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) ☐	Smaller reporting company ☑
	Emerging growth company ☑

 

 

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☑

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☑

 

The registrant was not a public company as of the last business day of its most recently completed second fiscal quarter and therefore cannot calculate the aggregate market value of its voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates as of such date.

 

As of March 19, 2018, there were 12,992,768 shares of Class A Common Stock and 2,409,738 shares of Class B Common Stock outstanding.

 

Documents Incorporated By Reference

The registrant intends to file a proxy statement pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017. Portions of such proxy statement are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

PART I
ITEM 1		Business		6
ITEM 1A		Risk Factors		23
ITEM 1B		Unresolved Staff Comments		45
ITEM 2		Properties		45
ITEM 3		Legal Proceedings		45
ITEM 4		Mine Safety Disclosures		45

PART II
ITEM 5		Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities		45
ITEM 6		Selected Financial Data		47
ITEM 7		Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations		48
ITEM 7A		Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk		72
ITEM 8		Financial Statements and Supplementary Data		73
ITEM 9		Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure		107
ITEM 9A		Controls and Procedures		107
ITEM 9B		Other Information		108

PART III
ITEM 10		Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance		109
ITEM 11		Executive Compensation		109
ITEM 12		Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters		109
ITEM 13		Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence		109
ITEM 14		Principal Accountant Fees and Services		109

PART IV
ITEM 15		Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules		109
ITEM 16		Form 10-K Summary		109
Signatures				112

 

We conduct our business operations principally through ACM Research (Shanghai), Inc., or ACM Shanghai, a subsidiary of ACM Research, Inc., or ACM Research. Unless the context requires otherwise, references in this report to “our company,” “our,” “us,” “we” and similar terms refer to ACM Research, Inc. (including its predecessor prior to its redomestication from California to Delaware in November 2016) and its subsidiaries, including ACM Shanghai, collectively.

SAPS, TEBO and ULTRA C are our trademarks. This report also contains other companies’ trademarks, registered marks and trade names, which are the property of those companies.

 

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS AND STATISTICAL DATA

 

Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, or this report, contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, included in this report regarding our strategy, future operations, future financial position, future revenue, projected costs, prospects, plans and objectives of management are forward-looking statements. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terms such as “may,” “might,” “will,” “objective,” “intend,” “should,” “could,” “can,” “would,” “expect,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “project,” “target,” “design,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “plan” or the negative of these terms, and similar expressions intended to identify forward-looking statements.

These statements reflect our current views with respect to future events and are based on our management’s belief and assumptions and on information currently available to our management. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in these forward-looking statements are reasonable, these statements relate to future events or our future operational or financial performance, and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Some of the key factors that could cause actual results to differ from our expectations include:

Any forward-looking statements made by us in this report speak only as of the date of our filing of this report with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, and are subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions described in “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update these statements publicly, or to update the reasons actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these statements, even if new information becomes available in the future.

This report, and the documents that we reference in this report and have filed as exhibits to this report, should be read completely and with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from what we expect. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.

Industry and Market Data

This report contains statistical data and estimates, including forecasts, that are based on independent industry and government organization publications or other publicly available information, as well as other information based on our internal sources. While we are not aware of any misstatements regarding any third-party data presented in this prospectus, estimates, and in particular forecasts, involve numerous assumptions and are subject to risks and uncertainties as well as change based on various factors, including those discussed under “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report. These and other factors could cause results to differ materially from those expressed in the estimates included in this report.

The following list identifies the sources of certain of the third-party forecasts and other estimates included in this report, together with the section or subsection of this report in which that estimate appears. As of the date of our filing of this report with the SEC, each of the following sources was publicly available without charge:

 

 

PART I

 

Item 1.  Business

Overview

We develop, manufacture and sell single-wafer wet cleaning equipment, which semiconductor manufacturers can use in numerous manufacturing steps to remove particles, contaminants and other random defects, and thereby improve product yield, in fabricating advanced integrated circuits, or chips. Our Ultra C equipment is designed to remove random defects from a wafer surface effectively, without damaging a wafer or its features, even at an increasingly advanced process node (the minimum line width on a chip) of 22 nanometers, or nm, or less. Our equipment is based on our innovative, proprietary Space Alternated Phase Shift, or SAPS, and Timely Energized Bubble Oscillation, or TEBO, technologies. We developed our proprietary technologies to enable manufacturers to produce chips that reach their ultimate physical limitations while maintaining product yield, which is the percentage of chips on a wafer that meet manufacturing specifications.

Since 2007 we have focused our development efforts on developing single-wafer wet cleaning equipment based on differentiated proprietary technology:

As of March 19, 2018, we had been issued more than 140 patents in the United States, the People’s Republic of China or the PRC, Japan, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.

We seek to market our single-wafer wet processing equipment by first establishing a referenceable base of leading logic and memory chip makers, whose use of our products can influence decisions by other manufacturers. Our SAPS technology employs alternating phases of megasonic waves to deliver megasonic energy to flat and patterned wafer surfaces in a highly uniform manner on a microscopic level. We believe this process is helping us penetrate the mature integrated circuit manufacturing markets and build credibility with industry leaders. Since beginning to place evaluation SAPS equipment with a small number of selected customers in 2009, we have worked on equipment improvements and qualification with those customers, who include a leading Korean memory chip company and four leading PRC memory and logic chip foundries. Using a similar “demo-to-sales” process, we have placed TEBO evaluation equipment with a leading PRC foundry and a leading Taiwanese foundry and we recognized revenue from our initial sale of TEBO equipment in 2016. Our revenue from the selected customers’ purchases of single-wafer wet cleaning equipment totaled $19.3 million, or 53.2% of our revenue, in 2017 and $21.5 million, or 78.4% of our total revenue, in 2016.

In 2006 we established our operational center in Shanghai, and we currently conduct substantially all of our development and manufacturing activities in the PRC. Our Shanghai operations position us near potential customers in not only the PRC but also Taiwan, Korea and throughout Asia, giving us increased access to those customers and reducing shipping and manufacturing costs for equipment they purchase. We continue to perform strategic planning and marketing activities in our corporate headquarters in Fremont, California, and we intend to increase the personnel and functions at our Fremont headquarters as part of our plan to expand our market presence in North America and Europe.

 

 

Industry Background

Semiconductors are the foundation of the exponential growth of digital technologies and applications. For more than thirty years, strong demand for personal computers, tablet computers, mobile phones and other digital products has fueled the growth of the semiconductor industry. Today the migration of computing, networking and storage to the cloud and the proliferation of “smart” appliances, buildings, cars and devices—the “Internet of Things”—are driving semiconductor development and manufacturing. IC Insights, Inc. (January 2018) estimates that worldwide semiconductor shipments grew from 103.7 billion units in 1987 to 986.2 billion units in 2017 and will increase at a rate of 9.0% to reach 1.1 trillion units in 2018.

Continuing Demand for Faster, Better, Cheaper Chips

New and enhanced digital applications and products have relied on the development and deployment of progressively faster and more powerful—but ever smaller and less costly—semiconductors known as integrated circuits, or chips. A chip is an array of transistors and other circuit elements built on a wafer of substrate material, typically silicon, with wiring and other interconnects that connect the circuit elements to each other and to outside devices. Chips store and manipulate data in binary form, with the two largest categories of integrated circuits being memory chips, for data storage and retrieval, and logic chips, for computer processing and control.

For a half century the number of transistors that can fit in a given area has roughly doubled every two years, a rate of improvement referred to as “Moore’s Law.” Chip feature sizes have been repeatedly scaled down to pack more transistors in smaller chips. The minimum line width on a chip, known as the node, shrank from 30,000nm in 1963 to 1,000nm in 1989, 90nm in 2003 and 14nm in 2014. A chip today may contain more than thirty billion transistors, with features finer than one ten-thousandth of the diameter of a human hair.

In recent years, however, the rate of chip improvement delivered solely by shrinking feature sizes has slowed. At the 22nm node, transistor and interconnect parameters for conventional chips, in which features are arrayed in 2D structures, begin to approach their critical performance limitations. For example, photolithography, a key chip manufacturing process that projects 193nm laser light through masks to print patterns on a wafer surface, may be unable to create patterning with sufficient resolution and selectivity. Moreover, the feature density and power levels of a 22nm chip may require additional circuit elements, such as special circuitry to correct errors or to track and adapt to performance variations, that occupy chip area and increase cost.

In order to extend Moore’s Law, chip designers and manufacturers are developing and implementing technologies and architectures to transition to advanced chips with 3D structures. Logic chip makers are rapidly adopting use of 3D, fin-shaped Fin Field Effect Transistors, or FinFET, which provide faster switching while consuming less power. For memory chip manufacturers, 3D NAND stacks memory cells to deliver greater capacity at lower cost and 3D cross point, a transistor-less memory cell architecture, is being developed to accelerate processing of massive data sets. EUV lithography is a promising manufacturing technology that could improve patterning capability and increase feature density at nodes of 5nm and beyond by extending photolithography to the extreme ultraviolet wavelength of 13.5nm.

Escalating Need for Advanced Chip Manufacturing Equipment

Manufacturing steps differ for logic and memory chips, but all chips are manufactured in two general processes:

Manufacturing advanced chips at smaller nodes requires a more complex process flow that incorporates enhanced, more expensive capital equipment, or tools, to perform increasingly complex process steps, as well as an increased number of tools to perform a greater number of process steps per wafer. A chip fabrication plant, or fab, may have more than 500 highly specialized tools representing more than 70 categories of equipment, all situated in an environmentally controlled “clean room.” As a result, construction of a new advanced fab can cost between $5 and $10 billion (Semiconductor Industry Association/Nathan Associates, May 2016). Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International or SEMI (December 2017) estimates that worldwide fab tool billings totaled $57.0 billion in 2017 and will reach $63.0 billion by 2017, an increase of 10.5%.

Because of the significant capital expenditures and manufacturing expenses, chip makers focus on improving their yield, which is the percentage of chips on a wafer that conform to specifications. Even with use of precision tools in a controlled manufacturing environment, a substantial number of chips may contain defects and be rejected, directly impacting cost-per-chip and profitability. We estimate that a 1% decrease in yield can reduce annual profits by $30 to $50 million for a fab producing dynamic random-access memory, or DRAM, chips on 100,000 wafers per month—and a 1% yield loss may decrease profits even more for a fab making logic chips, which typically have higher prices. Moreover, lower yield may necessitate greater fab capacity, increasing capital expenditures.

New technologies and architectures introduced in transitioning to more advanced nodes can lead to significant yield loss. We believe chip manufacturers with state-of-the-art, established fabs for process nodes of 22nm or more typically target a yield of 90% or more, but yield can drop to as low as 50% when, for example, a manufacturer migrates to chips incorporating FinFET. To reduce yield loss, a manufacturer transitioning to a more advanced node must implement additional fabrication steps and new process capabilities, which in turn require innovative, reliable front-end tool solutions.

Growing Influence of the PRC Across the Semiconductor Industry

The PRC is both the largest and the fastest-growing market for semiconductors. According to a study by PricewaterhouseCoopers (November 2017), during the ten-year period ending in 2016, the PRC’s semiconductor consumption grew at a CAGR of 12.0% while worldwide consumption increased by only 3.2%, and in 2016 the PRC consumed 58.5% of the world’s semiconductors. The PRC government is implementing focused policies, including state-led investment initiatives, that aim to create and support an independent domestic semiconductor supply chain spanning from design to final system production. The PRC has already made significant progress across the principal semiconductor industry sectors, as shown in the following market information compiled by PricewaterhouseCoopers (September and November 2017):

The PRC’s semiconductor tools industry produced less than 0.5% of the world’s semiconductor manufacturing equipment in 2014 (International Trade Association of U.S. Department of Commerce, July 2016). The PRC’s governmental goals anticipate significant growth in all segments of the domestic semiconductor industry, however, and tool manufacturers with a Chinese presence should experience support from both upstream and downstream Chinese companies in the semiconductor supply chain.

 

   

Our Strategy

 

Our objective is to be the leading global provider of a full range of wet cleaning equipment for the manufacture of advanced integrated circuits. To achieve this goal, we are pursuing the following strategies:

 

Extend technology leadership. We intend to build upon our technology leadership in wet processing by continuing to develop and refine our differentiated SAPS and TEBO technologies and equipment to address cleaning challenges presented by the manufacture of increasingly advanced chip nodes. Our investment in research and development totaled $5.1 million, or 14.1% of our revenue, in 2017 and $3.3 million, or 11.9% of our revenue, in 2016. We will continue to invest in product development and to strengthen our global patent portfolio in strategic jurisdictions.

 

Establish referenceable customer base. In commercializing our SAPS equipment, we placed evaluation equipment with selected customers, who subsequently purchased additional SAPS equipment to enable them to add more cleaning steps during their manufacturing processes. Using a similar “demo-to-sales” process, we have placed TEBO evaluation equipment with a leading PRC foundry and a leading Taiwanese foundry and we recognized revenue from our initial sale of TEBO equipment in 2016. Based on our market experience, we believe that implementation of our SAPS and TEBO equipment by selected leading memory and logic chip manufacturers will encourage evaluation of our equipment by other manufacturers, who will view the leading companies’ implementation as a validation of our equipment that facilitates a shorter evaluation process.

 

Leverage local presence to address growing Chinese market. The market for semiconductor manufacturing equipment in the PRC is expected to grow markedly in the upcoming years. Our experience has shown that chip manufacturers in the PRC demand equipment meeting their specific technical requirements and prefer building relationships with local suppliers. We established our operations in Shanghai a decade ago, and we will continue to work closely with chip manufacturers in the PRC and throughout Asia to understand their specific requirements, encourage them to adopt our SAPS and TEBO technologies, and enable us to design innovative products and solutions to address their needs.

 

Continue to improve performance through operational excellence. We actively manage our business through principles of operational excellence designed to ensure continuous improvement of our key operational and financial metrics. As we increase the breadth of our product offerings and the size of our operations and customer base, we must continue to develop and implement these principles in order to improve the efficiency and quality of our operations, satisfy our customers’ needs, and meet our financial goals.

 

Pursue strategic acquisitions and relationships. To complement and accelerate our internal growth, we may pursue acquisitions of businesses, technologies, products or business relationships that will expand the functionality of our products, provide access to new markets or customers, or otherwise complement our existing operations. We also may seek to expand our product and service offerings by entering into business relationships involving additional distribution channels, investments in other enterprises and joint ventures, or similar arrangements. In September 2017, we acquired 20% of the outstanding equity of Ninebell, one of our key subassembly providers.

Our Products and Technologies

We develop, manufacture and sell single-wafer wet cleaning equipment usable at numerous steps of the chip manufacturing process flow to improve product yield for conventional 2D and advanced 3D patterned chips at small process nodes. Our equipment, which we market and sell under the brand name “Ultra C,” is designed to remove random defects from a wafer surface effectively, without damaging the wafer or its features, even at increasingly advanced process nodes.

After incorporating in 1998, we initially focused on developing tools for manufacturing process steps involving the integration of ultra-low-K materials and copper. Ultra-low-K materials, which insulate better than silicon, presented opportunities for size scaling and performance improvement, and higher conductivity copper had begun to replace aluminum in forming interconnects. Our early efforts focused in particular on stress-free copper-polishing technology, and we sold tools based on that technology in the early 2000s.

 

 

In 2006 we established our operational center in Shanghai. This strategic decision was made to help us establish and build relationships with chip manufacturers in China and throughout Asia, which helps us to understand their requirements and to develop innovative technologies and tools addressing their needs.

In 2007 we began to focus our development efforts on single-wafer wet-cleaning solutions for the front-end fabrication process. We have developed innovative, proprietary technologies that reintroduce megasonic technology to the wafer cleaning process. Our approach is based on our understanding of the shortfalls and limitations of previously existing megasonic cleaning technologies that led to ineffective cleaning and damaged chip features. In 2009 we introduced our proprietary Space Alternated Phase Shift, or SAPS, megasonic technology, which can be applied in flat patterned wafer cleaning at numerous steps during the chip fabrication process. By delivering megasonic energy uniformly across a wafer, SAPS technology eliminates the particle removal inefficiencies that characterized traditional megasonic cleaning technologies. In March 2016 we introduced our proprietary Timely Energized Bubble Oscillation, or TEBO, technology, which can be applied at numerous steps during the fabrication of small node conventional 2D and 3D patterned wafers. By providing multi-parameter control of bubble cavitation during megasonic cleaning, TEBO technology avoids the fine-pattern damage caused by previously existing megasonic cleaning processes.

We have designed our equipment models for SAPS and TEBO solutions using a modular configuration that enables us to create a wet-cleaning tool meeting the specific requirements of a customer, while using pre-existing designs for chamber, electrical, chemical delivery and other modules. Our modular approach supports a wide range of customer needs and facilitates the adaptation of our model tools for use with the optimal chemicals selected to meet a customer’s requirements. Our tools are offered principally for use in manufacturing chips from 300mm silicon wafers, but we also offer solutions for 150mm and 200mm wafers and for nonstandard substrates, including quartz, sapphire and glass.

In addition to our SAPS and TEBO tool offerings, we offer a range of custom-made equipment, such as cleaners, coaters, developers, photoresist strippers, wet etchers and copper-plating tools, to back-end wafer assembly and packaging factories, principally in the PRC.

Space Alternated Phase Shift Cleaning

SAPS Technology

SAPS technology delivers megasonic energy uniformly to every point on an entire wafer by alternating phases of megasonic waves in the gap between a megasonic transducer and the wafer. Radicals for removing random defects are generated in dilute solution, and the radical generation is promoted by megasonic energy. Unlike “stationary” megasonic transducers used by conventional megasonic cleaning methods, SAPS technology moves or tilts a transducer while a wafer rotates, enabling megasonic energy to be delivered uniformly across all points on the wafer, even if the wafer is warped. The mechanical force of cavitations generated by megasonic energy enhances the mass transfer rate of dislodged random defects and improves particle removal efficiency.

By delivering megasonic energy in a highly uniform manner on a microscopic level, SAPS technology can precisely control the intensity of megasonic energy and can effectively remove random defects of all sizes across the entire wafer in less total cleaning time than conventional megasonic cleaning products, without loss of material or roughing of wafer surfaces. We have conducted trials demonstrating SAPS technology to be more effective than conventional megasonic and jet spray cleaning technologies as defect sizes shrink from 300nm to 45nm. These trials show that SAPs technology has an even greater relative advantage over conventional jet spray technology when cleaning defects between 50 and 65nm in size and that SAPs technology continues to be effective for defects of sizes between 45 nm and 50nm, for which jet spray technology has proven to be ineffective.

SAPS Applications

SAPS megasonic cleaning technology can be applied during the chip fabrication process to clean wafer surfaces and interconnects. It also can be used to clean, and lengthen the lifetime of, recycled test wafers.

 

 

Wafer Surfaces. SAPS technology can enhance removal of random defects following planarization and deposition, which are among the most important, and most repeated, steps in the fabrication process:

For these purposes, SAPS technology uses environmentally friendly dilute chemicals, reducing chemical consumption. Chemical types include dilute solutions of chemicals used in RCA cleaning, such as dilute hydrofluoric acid and RCA SC-1 solutions, and, for higher quality wafer cleaning, functional de-ionized water produced by dissolving hydrogen, nitrogen or carbon dioxide in water containing a small amount of chemicals, such as ammonia. Functional water removes random defects by generating radicals, and megasonic excitation can be used in conjunction with functional water to further increase the generation of radicals. Functional water has a lower cost and environmental impact than RCA solutions, and using functional water is more efficient in eliminating random defects than using dilute chemicals or de-ionized water alone. We have shown that SAPS megasonic technology using functional water exhibits high efficiency in removing random defects, especially particles smaller than 65nm, with minimal damage to structures.

Interconnects and Barrier Metals. Each successive advanced process node has led to finer feature sizes of interconnects such as contacts, which form electrical pathways between a transistor and the first metal layer, and vias, which form electrical pathways between two metal layers. Advanced nodes have also resulted in higher aspect ratios for interconnect structures, with thinner, redesigned metal barriers being used to prevent diffusion. SAPS technology can improve the removal of residues and other random defects from interconnects during the chip fabrication process:

For these applications, SAPS technology uses environmentally friendly dilute chemicals such as dilute hydrofluoric acid, RCA SC-1 solution, ozonated de-ionized water and functional de-ionized water with dissolved hydrogen. These chemical solutions take the place of piranha solution, a high-temperature mixture of sulfuric acid and hydrogen peroxide used by conventional wet wafer cleaning processes. We have shown that SAPS technology exhibits greater efficiency in removing random defects, and lower levels of material loss, than conventional processes, and our chemical solutions are less expensive and more environmentally conscious than piranha solution.

 

 

Recycled Test Wafers. In addition to using silicon wafers for chip production, chip manufacturers routinely process wafers through a limited portion of the front-end fabrication steps in order to evaluate the health, performance and reliability of those steps. Manufacturers also use wafers for non-product purposes such as inline monitoring. Wafers used for purposes other than manufacturing revenue products are known as test wafers, and it is typical for twenty to thirty percent of the wafers circulating in a fab to be test wafers. In light of the significant cost of wafers, manufacturers seek to re-use a test wafer for more than one test. As test wafers are recycled, surface roughness and other defects progressively impair the ability of a wafer to complete tests accurately. SAPS technology can be applied to reduce random defect levels of a recycled wafer, enabling the test wafer to be reclaimed for use in additional testing processes. For these purposes, SAPS technology includes improved fan filter units that balances intake and exhaust flows, precise temperature and concentration controls that ensure better handling of concentrated acid processes, and two-chemical recycle capability that reduces chemical consumption.

 

SAPS Equipment

We currently offer two models of wet wafer cleaning equipment based on our SAPS technology, Ultra C SAPS II and Ultra C SAPS V. Each of these models is a single-wafer, serial-processing tool that can be configured to customer specifications and, in conjunction with appropriate dilute

chemicals, used to remove random defects from wafer surfaces or interconnects and barrier metals as part of the chip front-end fabrication process or for purposes of recycling test wafers. By combining our megasonic and chemical cleaning technologies, we have designed these tools to remove random defects with greater efficacy and efficiency than conventional wafer cleaning processes, with enhanced process flexibility and reduced quantities of chemicals. Each of our SAPS models was initially built to meet specific requirements of a key customer. We expect the sales prices of our SAPS tools generally to range between $2.5 million and $5.0 million, although the sales price of a particular tool will vary depending upon the required specifications.

 

SAPS II was released in 2011. Its key features include:

 

● compact design, with footprint of 2.65m x 4.10m x 2.85m (WxDxH), requiring limited clean room floor space; ● up to 8 chambers, providing throughput of up to 225 wafers per hour; ● double-sided cleaning capability, with up to 5 cleaning chemicals for process flexibility; ● 2-chemical recycling capability for reduced chemical consumption; ● image wafer detection method for lowering wafer breakage rates; and ● chemical delivery module for delivery of dilute hydrofluoric acid, RCA SC-1 solution, functional de-ionized water and carbon dioxide to each of the chambers.

 

 

SAPS V, which was released in 2014, offers increased productivity for chip manufacturers moving to advanced nodes. SAPS V provides all of the features and functionality of SAPS II, upgraded as follows:

 

● compact design, with footprint of 2.55m x 5.1m x 2.85m (WxDxH); ● up to 12 chambers, providing throughput of up to 375 wafers per hour; ● chemical supply system integrated into mainframe; ● inline mixing method replaces tank auto-changing, reducing process time; and ● improved drying technology using hot isopropyl alcohol and de-ionized water.

 

Timely Energized Bubble Oscillation Cleaning

TEBO Technology

We developed TEBO technology for application in wet wafer cleaning during the fabrication of both conventional 2D and 3D patterned wafers with fine feature sizes. TEBO technology facilitates effective cleaning even with patterned features too small or fragile to be addressed by conventional jet spray and megasonic cleaning technologies.

TEBO technology solves the problems created by transient cavitation in conventional megasonic cleaning processes. Cavitation is the formation of bubbles in a liquid, and transient cavitation is a process in which a bubble in fluid implodes or collapses. In conventional megasonic cleaning processes, megasonic energy forms bubbles and then causes those bubbles to implode or collapse, blasting destructive high-pressure, high-temperature micro jets toward the wafer surface. Our internal testing has confirmed that at any level of megasonic energy capable of removing random defects, the sonic energy and mechanical force generated by transient cavitation are sufficiently strong to damage fragile patterned structures with features less than 70nm.

TEBO technology provides multi-parameter control of cavitation by using a sequence of rapid changes in pressure to force a bubble in liquid to oscillate at controlled sizes, shapes and temperatures, rather than implode or collapse. As a result, cavitation remains stable during TEBO megasonic cleaning processes, and a chip fabricator can, using TEBO technology, apply the level of megasonic energy needed to remove random defects without incurring the pattern damage created by transient cavitation in conventional megasonic cleaning.

We have demonstrated the damage-free cleaning capabilities of TEBO technology on customers’ patterned wafers as small as 1xnm (16nm to 19nm), and we believe TEBO technology will be applicable in even smaller fabrication process nodes. TEBO technology can be applied in manufacturing processes for conventional 2D chips with fine features and advanced chips with 3D structures, including FinFET, DRAM, 3D NAND and 3D cross point memory aswell as other 3D architectures that may be developed in the future, such as carbon nanotubes and quantum devices. As a result of the thorough, controlled nature of TEBO processes, cleaning time for TEBO-based solutions may take longer than conventional megasonic cleaning processes. Conventional processes have proven ineffective, however, for process nodes of 20nm or less, and we believe the increased yield that can be achieved by using TEBO technology for nodes up to 70nm can more than offset the cost of the additional time in utilizing TEBO technology.

TEBO Applications

At process nodes of 28nm and less, chip makers face escalating challenges in eliminating nanometric particles and maintaining the condition of inside pattern surfaces. In order to maintain chip quality and avoid yield loss, cleaning technologies must control random defects of diminishing killer defect sizes, without roughing or otherwise damaging surfaces of transistors, interconnects or other wafer features. TEBO technology can be applied in numerous steps throughout the manufacturing process flow for effective, damage-free cleaning:

For purposes of solving inside pattern surface conditions for memory or logic chips, TEBO technology uses environmentally friendly dilute chemicals such as RCA SC-1 and hydrogen gas doped functional water.

TEBO Equipment

We currently offer two models of wet wafer cleaning equipment based on our TEBO technology, Ultra C TEBO II and Ultra C TEBO V. Each of these models is a single-wafer, serial-processing tool that can be configured to customer specifications and, in conjunction with appropriate dilute chemicals, used at numerous manufacturing processing steps for effective, damage-free cleaning of chips at process nodes 28nm or less. TEBO equipment solves the problem of pattern damage caused by transient cavitation in conventional jet spray and megasonic cleaning processes, providing better particle removal efficiency with limited material loss or roughing. TEBO equipment currently is being evaluated by a select group of leading memory and logic chip customers, some of which recently have indicated an intent to move to production. We expect the sales prices of our TEBO tools generally to range between $3.5 million and $6.5 million, although the sales price of a particular tool will vary depending upon the required specifications.

Each model of TEBO equipment includes:

 

● an equipment front-end module, or EFEM, which moves wafers from chamber to chamber; ● one or more chamber modules, each equipped with a TEBO megasonic generator system; ● an electrical module to provide power for the tool; and ● a chemical delivery module.

 

Ultra C TEBO II was released in 2016. Its key features include:

 

● compact design, with footprint of 2.25m x 2.25m x 2.85m (WxDxH); ● up to 8 chambers with an upgraded transport system and optimized robotic scheduler, providing throughput of up to 300 wafers per hour; ● EFEM module consisting of 4 load ports, transfer robot and 1 process robot; and ● focus on dilute chemicals contributes to environmental sustainability and lower cost of ownership.

Ultra C TEBO V also was introduced in 2016, and its key features include:

 

● footprint of 2.45m x 5.30m x 2.85m (WxDxH);  ● up to 12 chamber modules, providing throughput of up to 300 wafers per hour; ● EFEM module consisting of 4 load ports, 1 transfer robot and 1 process robot; and ● chemical delivery module for delivery of isopropyl alcohol, dilute hydrofluoric acid, RCA SC-1 solution, functional de-ionized water and carbon dioxide to each of the chambers.

 

Custom-Made Wafer Assembly and Packaging Equipment

We leverage our technology and expertise to provide a range of single-wafer tools for back-end wafer assembly and packaging factories, principally in the PRC. We focus on providing custom-made, differentiated equipment that incorporates customer-requested features, at a competitive price. The sales prices for these tools generally range between $500,000 and $1.0 million, and these offerings generated $5.7 million, or 20.9%, of our revenue in 2016 and $4.2 million, or 13.5%, of our revenue in 2015.

 

For example, our Ultra C Coater is used in applying photoresist, a light-sensitive material used in photolithography to transfer a pattern from a mask onto a wafer. Coaters typically provide input and output elevators, shuttle systems and other devices to handle and transport wafers during the coating process. Unlike most coaters, the Ultra C Coater is fully automated. In addition, based on requests from customers, we developed and incorporated the special function of chamber auto-clean module into the Ultra C Coater, which further differentiates it from other products in the market. The Ultra C Coater is designed to deliver improved throughput and more efficient tool utilization while eliminating particle generation.

Our other advanced packaging tools include: Ultra C Developer, which applies liquid developer to selected parts of photoresist to resolve an image; Ultra C PR Megasonic-Assisted Stripper, which removes photoresist; Ultra C Scrubber, which scrubs and cleans wafers; and Ultra C Thin Wafer Scrubber, which addresses a sub-market of cleaning very thin wafers for certain Asian assembly factories; and Ultra C Wet Etcher, which etches silicon wafers and copper and titanium interconnects.

 

Our Customers

As of December 31, 2017, customers had purchased and deployed more than 30 Ultra C SAPS and TEBO cleaning tools. All of our sales in 2016 and 2017 were to customers located in Asia, and we anticipate that a substantial majority of our revenue will continue to come from customers located in this region for the near future. We have increased our efforts to penetrate the markets in North America and Western Europe, and we believe we are well positioned to begin generating sales in those regions.

We generate most of our revenue from a limited number of customers as the result of our strategy of initially placing SAPS - and TEBO-based equipment with a small number of leading chip manufacturers that are driving technology trends and key capability implementation. In 2017, 55.2% of our revenue was derived from four customers: SK Hynix Inc., a leading Korean memory chip company that accounted for 18.1% of our revenue; Shanghai Integrated Circuit Research and Development Center Ltd., a public research consortia for the Chinese semiconductor industry that accounted for 14.1% of our revenue; JiangYin ChangDian Advanced Packaging Co. Ltd., a leading PRC foundry that accounted for 12.8% of our revenue; and Yangtze Memory Technologies Co., Ltd., a leading PRC memory chip company that, together with one of its subsidiaries, accounted 10.2% of our revenue. In 2016 99.3% of our revenue was derived from four customers: Shanghai Huali Microelectronics Corporation, a leading PRC foundry that accounted for 33.7% of our revenue; Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation, a leading PRC foundry that accounted for 25.0% of our revenue; SK Hynix Inc. accounted for 24.0% of our revenue; and JiangYin ChangDian Advanced Packaging Co. Ltd., a leading PRC foundry that accounted for 16.6% of our revenue.

Based on our market experience, we believe that implementation of our equipment by one of our selected leading companies will attract and encourage other manufacturers to evaluate our equipment, because the leading company’s implementation will serve as validation of our equipment and will enable the other manufacturers to shorten their evaluation processes. We placed our first SAPS-based tool in 2009 as a prototype. We worked closely with the customer for two years in debugging and modifying the tool, and the customer then spent two more years of qualification and running pilot production before beginning volume manufacturing. Our revenue in 2015 included sales of SAPS-based tools following the customer’s completion of its qualification process. We expect that the period from new product introduction to high volume manufacturing will be three years or less in the future. Please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Our Industry—We depend on a small number of customers for a substantial portion of our revenue, and the loss of, or a significant reduction in orders from, one or more of our major customers could have a material adverse effect on our revenue and operating results. There are also a limited number of potential customers for our products.”

Customers continue to establish joint ventures, alliances and licensing arrangements that have the potential to positively or negatively impact our competitive position and market opportunities. A material reduction in orders from our large customers could adversely affect our results of operations and projected financial condition. Our business depends upon the expenditures of semiconductor manufacturers. Semiconductor manufacturers’ businesses, in turn, depend on many factors, including their financial capability, the current and anticipated market demand for integrated circuits, the global economy and the availability of equipment capacity to support that demand.

Sales and Marketing

We market and sell our products worldwide using a combination of our direct sales force and third-party representatives. We employ direct sales teams in Asia, Europe and North America, and have located these teams near our customers, primarily in the PRC, Korea, Taiwan and the United States. Each sales person has specific local market expertise. We also employ field application engineers, who are typically co-located with our direct sales teams, to provide technical pre- and post-sale support tours and other assistance to existing and potential customers throughout the customers’ fab planning and production line qualification and fab expansion phases. Our field application engineers are organized by end markets as well as core competencies in hardware, control system, software and process development to support our customers.

To supplement our direct sales teams, we have contacts with several independent sales representatives in the PRC, Taiwan and Korea. We select these independent representatives based on their ability to provide effective field sales, marketing forecast and technical support for our products. In the case of representatives, our customers place purchase orders with us directly rather than with the representatives.

Our sales have historically been made using purchase orders with agreed technical specifications. Our sales terms and conditions are generally consistent with industry practice, but may vary from customer to customer. We seek to obtain a purchase order three to four months ahead of the customer’s desired delivery date. For some customers, we receive a letter of intent three weeks ahead, followed by the corresponding purchase order five weeks ahead, of the customer’s desired delivery date. Consistent with industry practice, we allow customers to reschedule or cancel orders on relatively short notice. Because of our relatively short delivery period and our practice of permitting rescheduling or cancellation, we believe that backlog is not a reliable indicator of our future revenue.

Our marketing team focuses on our product strategy and technology road maps, product marketing, new product introduction processes, demand assessment and competitive analysis, customer requirement communication and public relations. Our marketing team also has the responsibility to conduct environmental scans, study industry trends and arrange our participation at major trade shows.

 

Manufacturing

All of our products are built to order at our facility in Shanghai. Our manufacturing facility has a total of 36,000 square feet, with 8,000 square feet of class 10,000 clean room space for product assembly and testing, plus 800 square feet of class 1 clean room space for product demonstration purposes. The rest of the area is used for product sub-assembly, component inventory and manufacturing related offices. A class designation for a clean room denotes the number of particles of size 0.5mm or larger permitted per cubic foot of air. Our manufacturing facility is ISO-9000 certified, and we have implemented certain manufacturing science-based factory practices such as constraint management, statistical process control and failure mode and effect analysis methodology.

In each of 2016 and 2017, we sourced approximately one-third of the parts and components ($8.0 million in 2016 and $10.8M in 2017) for our products from Chinese suppliers and the remaining parts and components were sourced from suppliers in the United States and, to a lesser extent, Japan and Korea

We purchase some of the components and assemblies that we include in our products from single source suppliers. We believe that we could obtain and qualify alternative sources to supply these components. Nevertheless, any prolonged inability to obtain these components could have an adverse effect on our operating results and could unfavorably impact our customer relationships. Please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Our Industry—We depend on a limited number of suppliers, including single source suppliers, for critical components and assemblies, and our business could be disrupted if they are unable to meet our needs.”

Research and Development

We believe that our success depends in part on our ability to develop and deliver breakthrough technologies and capabilities to meet our customers’ ever-more challenging technical requirements. For this reason, we devote significant financial and personnel resources to research and development. Our research and development team is comprised of highly skilled engineers and technologists with extensive experience in megasonic technology, cleaning processes and chemistry, mechanical design, and control system design. As of December 31, 2017, approximately half of our research and development personnel hold advanced technical degrees. To supplement our internal expertise, we also collaborate with external research and development entities such as International SEMATECH, a global consortium of computer chip manufacturers, on specific areas of interests and retain, as technical advisors, several experts in semiconductor technology.

For the foreseeable future we are focusing on enhancing our existing Ultra C SAPS and TEBO tools and integrating additional capabilities to meet and anticipate requirements from our existing and potential customers. Our particular areas of focus include development of the following:

Longer term, we are working on new proprietary process capabilities based on our existing tool hardware platforms. We are also working to integrate our tools with third-party tools in adjacent process areas in the chip manufacturing flow. Without reduction by grant amounts received from PRC governmental authorities (see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Key Components of Results of Operations—PRC Government Research and Development Funding”), our gross research and development expense totaled $8.6 million, or 23.4% of revenue, in 2017 and $9.5 million, or 34.7% of revenue, in 2016. We intend to continue to invest in research and development to support and enhance our existing cleaning products and to develop future product offerings to build and maintain our technology leadership position.

 

Intellectual Property

Our success and future revenue growth depend, in part, on our ability to protect our intellectual property. We control access to and use of our proprietary technologies, software and other confidential information through the use of internal and external controls, including contractual protections with employees, consultants, advisors, customers, partners and suppliers. We rely primarily on patent, copyright, trademark and trade secret laws, as well as confidentiality procedures, to protect our proprietary technologies and processes. All employees and consultants are required to execute confidentiality agreements in connection with their employment and consulting relationships with us. We also require them to agree to disclose and assign to us all inventions conceived or made in connection with the employment or consulting relationship.

We have aggressively pursued intellectual property since our founding in 1998. We focus our patent efforts in the United States, and, when justified by cost and strategic importance, we file corresponding foreign patent applications in strategic jurisdictions such as the European Union, the PRC, Japan, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan. Our patent strategy is designed to provide a balance between the need for coverage in our strategic markets and the need to maintain costs at a reasonable level.

As of December 31, 2017, we had 20 issued patents and numerous pending applications in the United States. These patents carry expiration dates from 2018 through 2027. Many of the US patents and applications have also been filed internationally, in one or more of the European Union, PRC, Japan, Korea, Singapore and Taiwan.

Specifically, we own patents in wafer cleaning, electro-polishing and plating, wafer preparation, and other semiconductor processing technologies.

We currently manufacture advanced single-wafer cleaning systems equipped with our SAPS and TEBO technologies. Our wafer cleaning technologies are protected by US Patent Numbers 8580042, 8671961, 9070723 and 9281177, as well as their corresponding international patents. We have 22 patents granted internationally protecting our SAPS technologies. We also have filed four international patent applications for key TEBO technologies in accordance with the Patent Cooperation Treaty, in anticipation of filing in the U.S. national phase.

In addition to the above core technologies, we have patents reflecting innovations in other aspects of wafer cleaning systems, such as cleaning solution recycling and wafer holding and positioning. During a wafer cleaning cycle, multiple cleaning solutions may be sequentially used. Our cleaning solution recycling technology prevents cross-contamination and allows recycling of the cleaning solutions. These innovations are protected by US Patent Numbers 6248222, 6495007, 6749728, 6726823, 6447668 and 7136173, as well as their corresponding international patents.

We have technologies for stress-free polishing, or SFP, and electrochemical plating, or ECP, that are used in certain of our tools. SFP is an integral part of the CMP process. Our technology was a breakthrough in electro-chemical-copper-planarization technology when it was first introduced, because it can polish, stress-free, oxidizing tantalum barrier layers used in copper low-K interconnects. Our innovations in SFP and ECP are reflected in US Patent Numbers 6395152, 6837984, 6440295, 6638863, 6391166 and 8518224, and their corresponding international counterparts.

We also have technologies in other semiconductor processing areas, such as wafer preparation and some specific processing steps. The wafer preparation technology is covered by US Patent Numbers 8383429 and 9295167. The specific processing steps include US Patent Number 7119008 titled “Integrating metal layers with ultra-low-K dielectrics,” and US Patent Number 8598039 titled “Barrier layer removal method and apparatus.”

To date we have not granted licenses to third parties under the patents described above. Not all of these patents have been implemented in products. We may enter into licensing or cross-licensing arrangements with other companies in the future.

We cannot assure you that any patents will issue from any of our pending applications. Any rights granted under any of our existing or future patents may not provide meaningful protection or any commercial advantage to us. With respect to our other proprietary rights, it may be possible for third parties to copy or otherwise obtain and use our proprietary technology or marks without authorization or to develop similar technology independently.

The semiconductor equipment industry is characterized by vigorous protection and pursuit of intellectual property rights or positions, which have resulted in often protracted and expensive litigation. We may in the future initiate claims or litigation against third parties to determine the validity and scope of proprietary rights of others. In addition, we may in the future initiate litigation to enforce our intellectual property rights or the rights of our customers or to protect our trade secrets.

 

Our customers could become the target of litigation relating to the patent or other intellectual property rights of others. This could trigger technical support and indemnification obligations in some of our customer agreements. These obligations could result in substantial expenses, including the payment by us of costs and damages related to claims of patent infringement. In addition to the time and expense required for us to provide support or indemnification to our customers, any such litigation could disrupt the businesses of our customers, which in turn could hurt our relations with our customers and cause the sale of our products to decrease. We do not have any insurance coverage for intellectual property infringement claims for which we may be obligated to provide indemnification.

Additional information about the risks relating to our intellectual property is provided under “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property.”

 

Competition

The chip equipment industry is characterized by rapid change and is highly competitive throughout the world. We compete with semiconductor equipment companies located around the world, and we may also face competition from new and emerging companies, including new competitors from the PRC. We consider our principal competitors to be those companies that provide single-wafer cleaning products to the market, including Lam Research Corp., DNS Electronics LLC, Tokyo Electron Ltd., SEMES Co. Ltd., Mujin Electronics Co., Ltd. and Beijing Sevenstar Science & Technology Co., Ltd.

Compared to our company, our current and potential competitors may have:

The principal competitive factors in our market include:

 

In addition, semiconductor manufacturers must make a substantial investment to qualify and integrate new equipment into semiconductor production lines. Some manufacturers have announced they will fabricate chips for the 10nm node beginning in 2017 and the 7nm node commencing in 2018, and we have one customer that currently is evaluating implementation of our equipment for both the 10nm and 7nm nodes. Once a semiconductor manufacturer has selected a particular supplier’s equipment and qualified it for production, the manufacturer generally maintains that selection for that specific production application and technology node as long as the supplier’s products demonstrate performance to specification in the installed base. Accordingly, we may experience difficulty in selling to a given manufacturer if that manufacturer has qualified a competitor’s equipment. If, however, that cleaning equipment constrains chip yield, we expect, based on our experience to date, that the manufacturer will evaluate implementing new equipment that cleans more effectively.

We focus on the high-end fabrication market with advanced nodes, and we believe we compete favorably with respect to the factors described above. Most of our competitors offer single-wafer cleaning products using jet spray technology, which has relatively poor particle removal efficiency for random defects less than 30nm in size and presents increased risk of damage to the fragile patterned architectures of wafers at advanced process nodes. Certain of our competitors offer single-wafer cleaning products with megasonic cleaning capability, but we believe these products, which use conventional megasonic technology, are unable to maintain energy dose uniformity on the entire wafer and often lack the ability to repeat the requisite uniform energy dose wafer to wafer in production, resulting in poor efficiency in removing random defects, longer processing time and greater loss of material. In addition, these conventional megasonic products generate transient cavitation, which results in more incidents of damage to wafer structures with feature sizes of 70nm or less. We design our cleaning tools equipped with our proprietary SAPS and TEBO technologies, which we believe offer better performance, including at advanced process nodes of 22nm or less. Moreover, with our operations based in Shanghai, we are well positioned to take advantage of the Chinese government’s policies to develop an independent domestic semiconductor supply chain.

 

 

Employees

As of December 31 2017, we had 191 full-time equivalent employees, of whom 22 were in administration, 50 were in manufacturing, 80 were in research and development, and 39 were in sales and marketing and customer services. Of these employees, 183 were located in the PRC, 4 were located in Korea and 4 were based in the United States.

We have never had a work stoppage, and none of our employees are represented by a labor organization or subject to any collective bargaining arrangements. We consider our employee relations to be good.

 

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Investing in Class A common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should consider and read carefully all of the risks and uncertainties described below, as well as other information contained in this report, including the consolidated financial statements and related notes set forth in “Item 1. Financial Statements” of Part I above, before making an investment decision. The occurrence of any of the following risks or additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. In any such case, the trading price of Class A common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment. This report also contains forward-looking statements and estimates that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of specific factors, including the risks and uncertainties described below.

Risks Related to Our Business and Our Industry

We have incurred significant losses since our inception and we are uncertain about our future profitability.

We have incurred significant losses since our inception in 1998, and as of December 31, 2017 we had an accumulated deficit of $10.0 million. We may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to achieve and sustain profitability. We expect our costs to increase in future periods, which could negatively affect our future operating results if our revenue does not increase. In particular, we expect to continue to expend substantial financial and other resources on:

These investments may not result in increased revenue or growth in our business. If we are unable to increase our revenue at a rate sufficient to offset the expected increase in our costs, then our business, financial position and results of operations will be harmed and we may not be able to achieve or maintain profitability over the long term. Additionally, we may encounter unforeseen operating expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other factors that may result in losses in future periods. If our revenue growth does not meet our expectations in future periods, our financial performance may be harmed and we may not achieve or maintain profitability in the future.

We currently have limited revenue and may not be able to regain or maintain profitability.

To date we have only generated limited revenue from sales of our products. Our revenue totaled $27.4 million in 2016 and $36.5 million in 2017. Our revenue was not sufficient to cover our operating expenses prior to 2015, and our net income decreased to $2.4 million in 2016 from $7.9 million in 2015. In 2017 we incurred an operating loss of $0.9 million, as compared to net income of $2.4 million in 2016. Our ability to generate significant revenue and operate profitably depends upon our ability to commercialize our Ultra C single-wafer wet cleaning equipment based on our SAPS and TEBO technologies. Our ability to generate significant product revenue from our current tools or future tool candidates also depends on a number of additional factors, including our ability to:

 

If we fail to regain and sustain profitability on a continuing basis, we may be unable to continue our operations at planned levels and be forced to reduce our operations or even shut down.

We may require additional capital in the future and we cannot give any assurance that such capital will be available at all or available on terms acceptable to us and, if it is available, additional capital raised by us may dilute holders of Class A common stock.

We may need to raise funds in the future, depending on many factors, including:

 

To the extent that our existing sources of cash, together with any cash generated from operations, are insufficient to fund our activities, we may need to raise additional funds through public or private financings, strategic relationships, or other arrangements. Additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If adequate funding is not available, we may be required to reduce expenditures, including curtailing our growth strategies and reducing our product development efforts, or to forego acquisition opportunities.

If we succeed in raising additional funds through the issuance of equity or convertible securities, then the issuance could result in substantial dilution to existing stockholders. Furthermore, the holders of these new securities or debt may have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of the holders of Class A common stock. In addition, any preferred equity issuance or debt financing that we may obtain in the future could have restrictive covenants relating to our capital raising activities and other financial and operational matters, which may make it more difficult for us to obtain additional capital and to pursue business opportunities, including potential acquisitions.

Our quarterly operating results can be difficult to predict and can fluctuate substantially, which could result in volatility in the price of Class A common stock.

Our quarterly revenue and other operating results have varied in the past and are likely to continue to vary significantly from quarter to quarter. Accordingly, you should not rely upon our past quarterly financial results as indicators of future performance. Any variations in our quarter-to-quarter performance may cause our stock price to fluctuate. Our financial results in any given quarter can be influenced by a variety of factors, including:

 

Seasonality has played an increasingly important role in the market for chip manufacturing tools. The period of November through February has been a particularly weak period historically for manufacturers of chip tools, in part because capital equipment needed to support manufacturing of chips for the December holidays usually needs to be in the supply chain by no later than October and chip makers in Asia often wait until after Chinese New Year, which occurs in January or February, before implementing their capital acquisition plans. The timing of new product releases also has an impact on seasonality, with the acquisition of manufacturing equipment occurring six to nine months before a new release.

Many of these factors are beyond our control, and the occurrence of one or more of them could cause our operating results to vary widely. As a result, it is difficult for us to forecast our quarterly revenue accurately. Our results of operations for any quarter may not be indicative of results for future quarters and quarter-to-quarter comparisons of our operating results are not necessarily meaningful. Variability in our periodic operating results could lead to volatility in our stock price. Because a substantial proportion of our expenses are relatively fixed in the short term, our results of operations will suffer if revenue falls below our expectations in a particular quarter, which could cause the price of Class A common stock to decline. Moreover, as a result of any of the foregoing factors, our operating results might not meet our announced guidance or expectations of public market analysts or investors, in which case the price of Class A common stock could decrease significantly.

Cyclicality in the semiconductor industry is likely to lead to substantial variations in demand for our products, and as a result our operating results could be adversely affected.

The chip industry has historically been cyclic and is characterized by wide fluctuations in product supply and demand. From time to time, this industry has experienced significant downturns, often in connection with, or in anticipation of, maturing product and technology cycles, excess inventories and declines in general economic conditions. This cyclicality could cause our operating results to decline dramatically from one period to the next.

Our business depends upon the capital spending of chip manufacturers, which, in turn, depends upon the current and anticipated market demand for chips. During industry downturns, chip manufacturers often have excess manufacturing capacity and may experience reductions in profitability due to lower sales and increased pricing pressure for their products. As a result, chip manufacturers generally sharply curtail their spending during industry downturns and historically have lowered their spending more than the decline in their revenues. If we are unable to control our expenses adequately in response to lower revenue from our customers, our operating results will suffer and we could experience operating losses.

 

Conversely, during industry upturns we must successfully increase production output to meet expected customer demand. This may require us or our suppliers, including third-party contractors, to order additional inventory, hire additional employees and expand manufacturing capacity. If we are unable to respond to a rapid increase in demand for our tools on a timely basis, or if we misjudge the timing, duration or magnitude of such an increase in demand, we may lose business to our competitors or incur increased costs disproportionate to any gains in revenue, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition or cash flows.

The PRC government is implementing focused policies, including state-led investment initiatives, that aim to create and support an independent domestic semiconductor supply chain spanning from design to final system production. If these policies, which include loans and subsidies, result in lower demand for equipment than is expected by equipment manufacturers, the resulting overcapacity in the chip manufacturing equipment market could lead to excess inventory and price discounting that could have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.

Our success will depend on industry chip manufacturers adopting our SAPS and TEBO technologies.

To date our strategy for commercializing our tools has been to place them with selected industry leaders in the manufacturing of memory and logic chips, the two largest chip categories, to enable those leading manufacturers to evaluate our technologies, and then leverage our reputation to gain broader market acceptance. In order for these industry leaders to adopt our tools, we need to establish our credibility by demonstrating the differentiated, innovative nature of our SAPS and TEBO technologies. Our SAPS technology has been tested and purchased by industry leaders, but has not achieved, and may never achieve, widespread market acceptance. We have initiated a similar commercialization process for our TEBO technology with a selected group of industry leaders. If these leading manufacturers do not agree that our technologies add significant value over conventional technologies or do not otherwise accept and use our tools, we may need to spend a significant amount of time and resources to enhance our technologies or develop new technologies. Even if these leading manufacturers adopt our technologies, other manufacturers may not choose to accept and adopt our tools and our products may not achieve widespread adoption. Any of the above factors would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

If our SAPS and TEBO technologies do not achieve widespread market acceptance, we will not be able to compete effectively.

The commercial success of our tools will depend, in part, on gaining substantial market acceptance by chip manufacturers. Our ability to gain acceptance for our products will depend upon a number of factors, including:

In addition, obtaining orders from new customers may be difficult because many chip manufacturers have pre-existing relationships with our competitors. Chip manufacturers must make a substantial investment to qualify and integrate wet processing equipment into a chip production line. Due, in part, to the cost of manufacturing equipment and the investment necessary to integrate a particular manufacturing process, a chip manufacturer that has selected a particular supplier’s equipment and qualified that equipment for production typically continues to use that equipment for the specific production application and process node, which is the minimum line width on a chip, as long as that equipment continues to meet performance specifications. Some of our potential and existing customers may prefer larger, more established vendors from which they can purchase equipment for a wider variety of process steps than our tools address. Further, because the cleaning process with our TEBO equipment can be up to five times longer than cleaning processes based on other technologies, we must convince chip manufacturers of the innovative, differentiated nature of our technologies and the benefits associated with using our tools. If we are unable to obtain new customers and continue to achieve widespread market acceptance of our tools, then our business, operations, financial results and growth prospects will be materially and adversely affected.

 

If we do not continue to enhance our existing single-wafer wet cleaning tools and achieve market acceptance, we will not be able to compete effectively.

We operate in an industry that is subject to evolving standards, rapid technological changes and changes in customer demands. Additionally, if process nodes continue to shrink to ever-smaller dimensions and conventional two-dimensional chips reach their critical performance limitations, the technology associated with manufacturing chips may advance to a point where our Ultra C equipment based on SAPS and TEBO technologies becomes obsolete. Accordingly, the future of our business will depend in large part upon the continuing relevance of our technological capabilities, our ability to interpret customer and market requirements in advance of tool deliveries, and our ability to introduce in a timely manner new tools that address chip makers’ requirements for cost-effective cleaning solutions. We expect to spend a significant amount of time and resources developing new tools and enhancing existing tools. Our ability to introduce and market successfully any new or enhanced cleaning equipment is subject to a wide variety of challenges during the tool’s development, including the following:

Certain enhancements to our Ultra C equipment in future periods may reduce demand for our pre-existing tools. As we introduce new or enhanced cleaning tools, we must manage the transition from older tools in order to minimize disruptions in customers’ ordering patterns, avoid excessive levels of older tool inventories and ensure timely delivery of sufficient supplies of new tools to meet customer demand. Furthermore, product introductions could delay purchases by customers awaiting arrival of our new products, which could cause us to fail to meet our expected level of production orders for pre-existing tools.

Our success will depend on our ability to identify and enter new product markets.

We expect to spend a significant amount of time and resources identifying new product markets in addition to the market for cleaning solutions and in developing new products for entry into these markets. Our TEBO technology took eight years to develop, and development of any new technology could require a similar, or even longer, period of time. Product development requires significant investments in engineering hours, third-party development costs, prototypes and sample materials, as well as sales and marketing expenses, which will not be recouped if the product launch is unsuccessful. We may fail to predict the needs of other markets accurately or develop new, innovative technologies to address those needs. Further, we may not be able to design and introduce new products in a timely or cost-efficient manner, and our new products may be more costly to develop, may fail to meet the requirements of the market, or may be adopted slower than we expect. If we are not able to introduce new products successfully, our inability to gain market share in new product markets could adversely affect our ability to sustain our revenue growth or maintain our current revenue levels.

If we fail to establish and maintain a reputation for credibility and product quality, our ability to expand our customer base will be impaired and our operating results may suffer.

We must develop and maintain a market reputation for innovative, differentiated technologies and high quality, reliable products in order to attract new customers and achieve widespread market acceptance of our products. Our market reputation is critical because we compete against several larger, more established competitors, many of which supply equipment for a larger number of process steps than we do to a broader customer base in an industry with a limited number of customers. In these circumstances, traditional marketing and branding efforts are of limited value, and our success depends on our ability to provide customers with reliable and technically sophisticated products. If the limited customer base does not perceive our products and services to be of high quality and effectiveness, our reputation could be harmed, which could adversely impact our ability to achieve our targeted growth.

 

We operate in a highly competitive industry and many of our competitors are larger, better-established, and have significantly greater operating and financial resources than we have.

The chip equipment industry is highly competitive, and we face substantial competition throughout the world in each of the markets we serve. Many of our current and potential competitors have, among other things:

These competitors may also have the ability to offer their products at lower prices by subsidizing their losses in wet cleaning with profits from other lines of business in order to retain current or obtain new customers. Among other things, some competitors have the ability to offer bundled discounts for customers purchasing multiple products. Many of our competitors have more extensive customer and partner relationships than we do and may therefore be in a better position to identify and respond to market developments and changes in customer demands. Potential customers may prefer to purchase from their existing suppliers rather than a new supplier, regardless of product performance or features. If we are not able to compete successfully against existing or new competitors, our business, operating results and financial condition will be negatively affected.

We depend on a small number of customers for a substantial portion of our revenue, and the loss of, or a significant reduction in orders from, one of our major customers could have a material adverse effect on our revenue and operating results. There are also a limited number of potential customers for our products.

We may be unable to sustain or increase our revenue from our larger customers or offset the discontinuation of concentrated purchases by our larger customers with purchases by new or existing customers. We expect a small number of customers will continue to account for a high percentage of our revenue for the foreseeable future and that our results of operations may fluctuate materially as a result of such larger customers’ buying patterns. Thus, our business success depends on our ability to maintain strong relationships with our customers. The loss of any of our key customers for any reason, or a change in our relationship with any of our key customers, including a significant delay or reduction in their purchases, may cause a significant decrease in our revenue, which we may not be able to recapture due to the limited number of potential customers.

We have seen, and may see in the future, consolidation of our customer base. Industry consolidation generally has negative implications for equipment suppliers, including a reduction in the number of potential customers, a decrease in aggregate capital spending and greater pricing leverage on the part of consumers over equipment suppliers. Continued consolidation of the chip industry could make it more difficult for us to grow our customer base, increase sales of our products and maintain adequate gross margins.

 

Our customers do not enter into long-term purchase commitments, and they may decrease, cancel or delay their projected purchases at any time.

In accordance with industry practice, our sales are on a purchase order basis, which we seek to obtain three to four months in advance of the expected product delivery date. Until a purchase order is received, we do not have a binding purchase commitment. Our SAPS and TEBO customers to date have provided us with non-binding one- to two-year forecasts of their anticipated demands, but those forecasts can be changed at any time, without any required notice to us. Because the lead-time needed to produce a tool customized to a customer’s specifications can extend up to six months, we may need to begin production of tools based on non-binding forecasts, rather than waiting to receive a binding purchase order. No assurance can be made that a customer’s forecast will result in a firm purchase order within the time period we expect, or at all.

If we do not accurately predict the amount and timing of a customer’s future purchases, we risk expending time and resources on producing a customized tool that is not purchased by a particular customer, which may result in excess or unwanted inventory, or we may be unable to fulfill an order on the schedule required by a purchase order, which would result in foregone sales. Customers may place purchase orders that exceed forecasted amounts, which could result in delays in our delivery time and harm our reputation. In the future a customer may decide not to purchase our tools at all, may purchase fewer tools than it did in the past or may otherwise alter its purchasing patterns, and the impact of any such actions may be intensified given our dependence on a small number of large customers. Our customers make major purchases periodically as they add capacity or otherwise implement technology upgrades. If any significant customers cancel, delay or reduce orders, our operating results could suffer.

We may incur significant expenses long before we can recognize revenue from new products, if at all, due to the costs and length of research, development, manufacturing and customer evaluation process cycles.

We often incur significant research and development costs for products that are purchased by our customers only after much, or all, of the cost has been incurred or that may never be purchased. We allow new customers, or existing customers considering new products, to evaluate products without any payment becoming due unless the product is ultimately accepted, which means we may invest $1.0 to $2.0 million in manufacturing a tool that may never be accepted and purchased or may be purchased months or even years after production. In the past we have borrowed money in order to fund first-time purchase order equipment and next-generation evaluation equipment. When we complete a first-time sale, we may not receive payment for up to 24 months. Even returning customers may take as long as six months to make any payments. If our sales efforts are unsuccessful after expending significant resources, or if we experience delays in completing sales, our future cash flow, revenue and profitability may fluctuate or be materially adversely affected.

Our sales cycle is long and unpredictable, which results in variability of our financial performance and may require us to incur high sales and marketing expenses with no assurance that a sale will result, all of which could adversely affect our profitability.

Our results of operations may fluctuate, in part, because of the resource-intensive nature of our sales efforts and the length and variability of our sales cycle. A sales cycle is the period between initial contact with a prospective customer and any sale of our tools. Our sales process involves educating customers about our tools, participating in extended tool evaluations and configuring our tools to customer-specific needs, after which customers may evaluate the tools. The length of our sales cycle, from initial contact with a customer to the execution of a purchase order, is generally 6 to 24 months. During the sales cycle, we expend significant time and money on sales and marketing activities and make investments in evaluation equipment, all of which lower our operating margins, particularly if no sale occurs or if the sale is delayed as a result of extended qualification processes or delays from our customers’ customers.

The duration or ultimate success of our sales cycle depends on factors such as:

It is difficult to predict exactly when, or even if, we will make a sale to a potential customer or if we can increase sales to our existing customers. As a result, we may not recognize revenue from our sales efforts for extended periods of time, or at all. The loss or delay of one or more large transactions in a quarter could impact our results of operations for that quarter and any future quarters for which revenue from that transaction is lost or delayed. In addition, we believe that the length of the sales cycle and intensity of the evaluation process may increase for those current and potential customers that centralize their purchasing decisions.

 

Difficulties in forecasting demand for our tools may lead to periodic inventory shortages or excess spending on inventory items that may not be used.

We need to manage our inventory of components and production of tools effectively to meet changing customer requirements. Accurately forecasting customers’ needs is difficult. Our tool demand forecasts are based on multiple assumptions, including non-binding forecasts received from our customers years in advance, each of which may introduce error into our estimates. Inventory levels for components necessary to build our tools in excess of customer demand may result in inventory write-downs and could have an adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition. Conversely, if we underestimate demand for our tools or if our manufacturing partners fail to supply components we require at the time we need them, we may experience inventory shortages. Such shortages might delay production or shipments to customers and may cause us to lose sales. These shortages may also harm our credibility, diminish the loyalty of our channel partners or customers.

A failure to prevent inventory shortages or accurately predict customers’ needs could result in decreased revenue and gross margins and harm our business.

Some of our products and supplies may become obsolete or be deemed excess while in inventory due to rapidly changing customer specifications, changes in product structure, components or bills of material as a result of engineering changes, or a decrease in customer demand. We also have exposure to contractual liabilities to our contract manufacturers for inventories purchased by them on our behalf, based on our forecasted requirements, which may become excess or obsolete. Our inventory balances also represent an investment of cash. To the extent our inventory turns are slower than we anticipate based on historical practice, our cash conversion cycle extends and more of our cash remains invested in working capital. If we are not able to manage our inventory effectively, we may need to write down the value of some of our existing inventory or write off non-saleable or obsolete inventory. Any such charges we incur in future periods could materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

The difficulty in forecasting demand also makes it difficult to estimate our future results of operations and financial condition from period to period. A failure to accurately predict the level of demand for our products could adversely affect our net revenue and net income, and we are unlikely to forecast such effects with any certainty in advance.

If our tools contain defects or do not meet customer specifications, we could lose customers and revenue.

Highly complex tools such as our may develop defects during the manufacturing and assembly process. We may also experience difficulties in customizing our tools to meet customer specifications or detecting defects during the development and manufacturing of our tools. Some of these failures may not be discovered until we have expended significant resources in customizing our tools, or until our tools have been installed in our customers’ production facilities. These quality problems could harm our reputation as well as our customer relationships in the following ways:

In addition, defects in our tools or our inability to meet the needs of our customers could cause damage to our customers’ products or manufacturing facilities, which could result in claims for product liability, tort or breach of warranty, including claims from our customers. The cost of defending such a lawsuit, regardless of its merit, could be substantial and could divert management’s attention from our ongoing operations. In addition, if our business liability insurance coverage proves inadequate with respect to a claim or future coverage is unavailable on acceptable terms or at all, we may be liable for payment of substantial damages. Any or all of these potential consequences could have an adverse impact on our operating results and financial condition.

 

Warranty claims in excess of our estimates could adversely affect our business.

We have provided warranties against manufacturing defects of our tools that range from 12 to 36 months in duration. Our product warranty requires us to provide labor and parts necessary to repair defects. To date we have not accrued a significant liability contingency for potential warranty claims. Warranty claims substantially in excess of our expectations, or significant unexpected costs associated with warranty claims, could harm our reputation and could cause customers to decline to place new or additional orders, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We rely on third parties to manufacture significant portions of our tools and our failure to manage our relationships with these parties could harm our relationships with our customers, increase our costs, decrease our sales and limit our growth.

Our tools are complex and require components and subassemblies having a high degree of reliability, accuracy and performance. We rely on third parties to manufacture most of the subassemblies and supply most of the components used in our tools. Accordingly, we cannot directly control our delivery schedules and quality assurance. This lack of control could result in shortages or quality assurance problems. These issues could delay shipments of our tools, increase our testing costs or lead to costly failure claims.

We do not have long-term supply contracts with some of our suppliers, and those suppliers are not obligated to perform services or supply products to us for any specific period, in any specific quantities or at any specific price, except as may be provided in a particular purchase order. In addition, we attempt to maintain relatively low inventories and acquire subassemblies and components only as needed. There are significant risks associated with our reliance on these third-party suppliers, including:

Any delays in the shipment of our products due to our reliance on third-party suppliers could harm our relationships with our customers. In addition, any increase in costs due to our suppliers increasing the price they charge us for subassemblies and components or arising from our need to replace our current suppliers that we are unable to pass on to our customers could negatively affect our operating results.

Any shortage of components or subassemblies could result in delayed delivery of products to us or in increased costs to us, which could harm our business.

The ability of our manufacturers to supply our tools is dependent, in part, upon the availability certain components and subassemblies. Our manufacturers may experience shortages in the availability of such components or subassemblies, which could result in delayed delivery of products to us or in increased costs to us. Any shortage of components or subassemblies or any inability to control costs associated with manufacturing could increase the costs for our products or impair our ability to ship orders in a timely cost-efficient manner. As a result, we could experience cancellation of orders, refusal to accept deliveries or a reduction in our prices and margins, any of which could harm our financial performance and results of operations.

We depend on a limited number of suppliers, including single source suppliers, for critical components and subassemblies, and our business could be disrupted if they are unable to meet our needs.

We depend on a limited number of suppliers for components and subassemblies used in our tools. Certain components and subassemblies of our tools have only been purchased from our current suppliers to date, and changing the source of those components and subassemblies may result in disruptions during the transition process and entail significant delay and expense. We rely on Product Systems, Inc., or ProSys, as the sole supplier of megasonic transducers, a key subassembly used in our single-wafer cleaning equipment. We also rely on Ninebell Co., Ltd., or Ninebell, which is the principal supplier of robotic delivery system subassemblies used in our single-wafer cleaning equipment. An adverse change to our relationship with ProSys or Ninebell would disrupt our production of single-wafer cleaning equipment and could cause substantial harm to our business.

With some of these suppliers, we do not have long-term agreements and instead purchase components and subassemblies through a purchase order process. As a result, these suppliers may stop supplying us components and subassemblies, limit the allocation of supply and equipment to us due to increased industry demand or significantly increase their prices at any time with little or no advance notice. Our reliance on a limited number of suppliers could also result in delivery problems, reduced control over product pricing and quality, and our inability to identify and qualify another supplier in a timely manner.

 

Moreover, some of our suppliers may experience financial difficulties that could prevent them from supplying us with components or subassemblies used in the design and manufacture of our products. In addition, our suppliers, including our sole supplier ProSys, may experience manufacturing delays or shut downs due to circumstances beyond their control, such as labor issues, political unrest or natural disasters. Any supply deficiencies could materially and adversely affect our ability to fulfill customer orders and our results of operations. We have in the past and may in the future, experience delays or reductions in supply shipments, which could reduce our revenue and profitability. If key components or materials are unavailable, our costs would increase and our revenue would decline.

We have depended on PRC governmental subsidies to help fund our technology development since 2008, and our failure to obtain additional subsidies may impede our development of new technologies and may increase our cost of capital, either of which could make it difficult for us to expand our product base.

We received subsidies from local and central governmental authorities in the PRC in 2008, 2009 and 2014. These grants have provided a majority of the funding for our development and commercialization of stress-free polishing and electro copper-plating technologies. If we are unable to obtain similar governmental subsidies for development projects in the future, we may need to raise additional funds through public or private financings, strategic relationships, or other arrangements, which could force us to reduce our efforts to develop technologies beyond SAPS and TEBO. To the extent that we receive a lower level of, or no, governmental subsidies in the future, we may need to raise additional funds through public or private financings, strategic relationships, or other arrangements.

The success of our business will depend on our ability to manage any future growth.

We have experienced rapid growth in our business recently due, in part, to an expansion of our product offerings and an increase in the number of customers that we serve. For example, our headcount grew by 18.7% during 2016 and by an additional 28.1% during 2017. We will seek to continue to expand our operations in the future, including by adding new offices, locations and employees. Managing our growth has placed and could continue to place a significant strain on our management, other personnel and our infrastructure. If we are unable to manage our growth effectively, we may not be able to take advantage of market opportunities, develop new products, enhance our technological capabilities, satisfy customer requirements, respond to competitive pressures or otherwise execute our business plan. In addition, any inability to manage our growth effectively could result in operating inefficiencies that could impair our competitive position and increase our costs disproportionately to the amount of growth we achieve. To manage our growth, we believe we must effectively:

Our organizational structure has become more complex, and we will need to continue to scale and adapt our operational, financial and management controls, as well as our reporting systems and procedures. The continued expansion of our infrastructure will require us to commit substantial financial, operational and management resources before our revenue increases and without any assurances that our revenue will increase.

We are highly dependent on our Chief Executive Officer and President and other senior management and key employees, and we currently do not have a permanent Chief Financial Officer.

 

Our success largely depends on the skills, experience and continued efforts of our management, technical and sales personnel, including in particular Dr. David H. Wang, our Chair of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, President and founder. In January 2018 we notified our former Chief Financial Officer of the termination of his employment effective January 24, 2018. Our Chief Accounting Officer, who joined us effective January 24, 2018, currently is serving as our interim Chief Financial Officer. We are uncertain as to when we will be able to identify and hire a successor Chief Financial Office, and we may incur significant expense in recruiting and hiring such a successor. If one or more of our other senior management were unable or unwilling to continue their employment with us, we may not be able to replace them in a timely manner. We may incur additional expenses to recruit and retain qualified replacements. We do not currently maintain key person life insurance policies on any of our employees. Our business may be severely disrupted and our financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected. In addition, our senior management may join a competitor or form a competing company. All of our senior management are at-will employees, which means either we or the employee may terminate their employment at any time. The loss of Dr. Wang or other key management personnel, including our former Chief Financial Officer, could significantly delay or prevent the achievement of our business objectives.

 

Failure to attract and retain qualified personnel could put us at a competitive disadvantage and prevent us from effectively growing our business.

Our future success depends, in part, on our ability to continue to attract and retain highly skilled personnel. There is substantial competition for experienced management, technical and sales personnel in the chip equipment industry. If qualified personnel become scarce or difficult to attract or retain for compensation-related or other reasons, we could experience higher labor, recruiting or training costs. New hires may require significant training and time before they achieve full productivity and may not become as productive as we expect. If we are unable to retain and motivate our existing employees and attract qualified personnel to fill key positions, we may experience inadequate levels of staffing to develop and market our products and perform services for our customers, which could have a negative effect on our operating results.

Our ability to utilize certain U.S. and state net operating loss carryforwards may be limited under applicable tax laws.

As of December 31, 2017, we had net operating loss carryforward amounts, or NOLs, of $20.1 million for U.S. federal income tax purposes and $536,000 for U.S. state income tax purposes. The federal and state NOLs will expire at various dates beginning in 2019.

Utilization of these NOLs could be subject to a substantial annual limitation if the ownership change limitations under U.S. Internal Revenue Code Sections 382 and 383 and similar U.S. state provisions are triggered by changes in the ownership of our capital stock. Such an annual limitation would result in the expiration of the NOLs before utilization. Our existing NOLs may be subject to limitations arising from previous ownership changes, including in connection with our initial public offering and concurrent private placement in November 2017 and any future follow-on public offerings. Future changes in our stock ownership, some of which are outside of our control, could result in an ownership change. Regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs, or other unforeseen reasons, may cause our existing NOLs to expire or otherwise become unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. Additionally, U.S. state NOLs generated in one state cannot be used to offset income generated in another U.S. state. For these reasons, we may be limited in our ability to realize tax benefits from the use of our NOLs, even if our profitability would otherwise allow for it.

Acquisitions that we pursue in the future, whether or not consummated, could result in other operating and financial difficulties.

In the future we may seek to acquire additional product lines, technologies or businesses in an effort to increase our growth, enhance our ability to compete, complement our product offerings, enter new and adjacent markets, obtain access to additional technical resources, enhance our intellectual property rights or pursue other competitive opportunities. We may also make investments in certain key suppliers to align our interests with such suppliers. If we seek acquisitions, we may not be able to identify suitable acquisition candidates at prices we consider appropriate. We cannot readily predict the timing or size of our future acquisitions, or the success of any future acquisitions.

To the extent that we consummate acquisitions or investments, we may face financial risks as a result, including increased costs associated with merged or acquired operations, increased indebtedness, economic dilution to gross and operating profit and earnings per share, or unanticipated costs and liabilities. Acquisitions may involve additional risks, including:

 

From time to time, we may enter into negotiations for acquisitions or investments that are not ultimately consummated. These negotiations could result in significant diversion of management time, as well as substantial out-of-pocket costs, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition.

Future declines in the semiconductor industry, and the overall world economic conditions on which the industry is significantly dependent, could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations and financial condition.

Our business depends on the capital equipment expenditures of chip manufacturers, which in turn depend on the current and anticipated market demand for integrated circuits. With the consolidation of customers within the industry, the chip capital equipment market may experience rapid changes in demand driven both by changes in the market generally and the plans and requirements of particular customers. Global economic and business conditions, which are often unpredictable, have historically impacted customer demand for our products and normal commercial relationships with our customers, suppliers and creditors. Additionally, in times of economic uncertainty our customers’ budgets for our tools, or their ability to access credit to purchase them, could be adversely affected. This would limit their ability to purchase our products and services. As a result, economic downturns could cause material adverse changes to our results of operations and financial condition including:

Fluctuating levels of investment by chip manufacturers may materially affect our aggregate shipments, revenue, operating results and earnings. Where appropriate, we will attempt to respond to these fluctuations with cost management programs aimed at aligning our expenditures with anticipated revenue streams, which could result in restructuring charges. Even during periods of reduced revenues, we must continue to invest in research and development and maintain extensive ongoing worldwide customer service and support capabilities to remain competitive, which may temporarily harm our profitability and other financial results.

We conduct substantially all of our operations outside the United States and face risks associated with conducting business in foreign markets.

All of our sales in 2016 and 2017 were made to customers outside the United States. Our manufacturing center has been located in Shanghai, PRC since 2006 and substantially all of our operations are located in the PRC. We expect that all of our significant activities will remain outside the United States in the future. We are subject to a number of risks associated with our international business activities, including:

 

In particular, the Asian market is extremely competitive, and chip manufacturers may be aggressive in seeking price concessions from suppliers, including chip equipment manufacturers.

We may not be successful in developing and implementing policies and strategies that will be effective in managing these risks in each country in which we do business. Our failure to manage these risks successfully could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

Fluctuation in foreign currency exchange rates may adversely affect our results of operations and financial position.

Our results of operations and financial position could be adversely affected as a result of fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates. Although our financial statements are denominated in U.S. dollars, a sizable portion of our revenues and costs are denominated in other currencies, primarily the Chinese Renminbi. Because many of our raw material purchases are denominated in Renminbi while the majority of the purchase orders we receive are denominated in U.S. dollars, exchange rates have a significant effect on our gross margin. We have not engaged in any foreign currency exchange hedging transactions to date, and any strategies that we may use in the future to reduce the adverse impact of fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates may not be successful. Our foreign currency exposure with respect to assets and liabilities for which we do not have hedging arrangements could have a material impact on our results of operations in periods when the U.S. dollar significantly fluctuates in relation to unhedged non-U.S. currencies in which we transact business.

Changes in political and economic policies of the PRC government may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and may result in our inability to sustain our growth and expansion strategies.

Substantially all of our operations are conducted in the PRC, and a substantial majority of our revenue is sourced from the PRC. Accordingly, our financial condition and results of operations are affected to a significant extent by economics, political and legal developments in the PRC.

The Chinese economy differs from the economies of most developed countries in many respects, including the extent of government involvement, level of development, growth rate, and control of foreign exchange and allocation of resources. Although the PRC government has implemented measures emphasizing the utilization of market forces for economic reform, the reduction of state ownership of productive assets and the establishment of improved corporate governance in business enterprises, a substantial portion of productive assets in the PRC are still owned by the government. In addition, the PRC government continues to play a significant role in regulating industry development by imposing industrial policies. The PRC government also exercises significant control over economic growth in the PRC by allocating resources, controlling payment of foreign currency-denominated obligations, setting monetary policy, regulating financial services and institutions, and providing preferential treatment to particular industries or companies.

 

While the PRC economy has experienced significant growth in the past three decades, growth has been uneven, both geographically and among various sectors of the economy. The PRC government has implemented various measures to encourage economic growth and guide the allocation of resources. Some of these measures may benefit the overall PRC economy, but may also have a negative effect on us. Our financial condition and results of operation could be materially and adversely affected by government control over capital investments or changes in tax regulations that are applicable to us. In the past the PRC government has implemented measures to control the pace of economic growth, and similar measures in the future may cause decreased economic activity, which in turn could lead to a reduction in demand for our products and consequently have a material adverse effect on our businesses, financial condition and results of operations.

Although the PRC government has been implementing policies to develop an independent domestic semiconductor industry supply chain, there is no guaranteed time frame in which these initiatives will be implemented. We cannot guarantee that the implementation of these policies will result in additional revenue to us or that our presence in the PRC will result in support from the PRC government. To the extent that any capital investment or other assistance from the PRC government is not provided to us, it could be used to promote the products and technologies of our competitors, which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

We are subject to government regulation, including import, export, economic sanctions, and anti-corruption laws and regulations, that may limit our sales opportunities, expose us to liability and increase our costs.

Our products are subject to import and export controls in jurisdictions in which we distribute or sell our products. Import and exports control and economic sanctions laws and regulations include restrictions and prohibitions on the sale or supply of certain products and on our transfer of parts, components, and related technical information and know-how to certain countries, regions, governments, persons and entities.

Various countries regulate the importation of certain products through import permitting and licensing requirements and have enacted laws that could limit our ability to distribute our products. The exportation, re-exportation, transfers within foreign countries and importation of our products, including by our partners, must comply with these laws and regulations, and any violations may result in reputational harm, government investigations and penalties, and a denial or curtailment of exporting. Complying with export control and sanctions laws for a particular sale may be time consuming, may increase our costs, and may result in the delay or loss of sales opportunities. If we are found to be in violation of U.S. sanctions or export control laws, or similar laws in other jurisdictions, we and the individuals working for us could incur substantial fines and penalties. Changes in export, sanctions or import laws or regulations may delay the introduction and sale of our products in international markets, require us to spend resources to seek necessary government authorizations or to develop different versions of our products, or, in some cases, prevent the export or import of our products to certain countries, regions, governments, persons or entities, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.

We are subject to various domestic and international anti-corruption laws, such as the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, as well as similar anti-bribery and anti-kickback laws and regulations. These laws and regulations generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from offering or making improper payments to non-U.S. officials for the purpose of obtaining, retaining or directing business. Our exposure for violating these laws and regulations increases as our international presence expands and as we increase sales and operations in foreign jurisdictions.

Breaches of our cybersecurity systems could degrade our ability to conduct our business operations and deliver products to our customers, result in data losses and the theft of our intellectual property, damage our reputation, and require us to incur significant additional costs to maintain the security of our networks and data.

We increasingly depend upon our information technology systems to conduct our business operations, ranging from our internal operations and product development and manufacturing activities to our marketing and sales efforts and communications with our customers and business partners. Computer programmers may attempt to penetrate our network security, or that of our website, and misappropriate our proprietary information or cause interruptions of our service. Because the techniques used by such computer programmers to access or sabotage networks change frequently and may not be recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques. We have also outsourced a number of our business functions to third-party contractors, including our manufacturers, and our business operations also depend, in part, on the success of our contractors’ own cybersecurity measures. Accordingly, if our cybersecurity systems and those of our contractors fail to protect against unauthorized access, sophisticated cyberattacks and the mishandling of data by our employees and contractors, our ability to conduct our business effectively could be damaged in a number of ways, including sensitive data regarding our employees or business, including intellectual property and other proprietary data, could be stolen. Should this occur, we could be subject to significant claims for liability from our customers and regulatory actions from governmental agencies. In addition, our ability to protect our intellectual property rights could be compromised and our reputation and competitive position could be significantly harmed. Consequently, our financial performance and results of operations could be adversely affected.

 

Our production facilities could be damaged or disrupted by a natural disaster, war, terrorist attacks or other catastrophic events.

Our manufacturing facilities are subject to risks associated with natural disasters, such as earthquakes, fires, floods tsunami, typhoons and volcanic activity, environmental disasters, health epidemics, and other events beyond our control such as power loss, telecommunications failures, and uncertainties arising out of armed conflicts or terrorist attacks. A substantial majority of our facilities as well as our research and development personnel are located in the PRC. Any catastrophic loss or significant damage to any of our facilities would likely disrupt our operations, delay production, and adversely affect our product development schedules, shipments and revenue. In addition, any such catastrophic loss or significant damage could result in significant expense to repair or replace the facility and could significantly curtail our research and development efforts in a particular product area or primary market, which could have a material adverse effect on our operations and operating results.

Our management and auditors identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting that, if not properly remediated, could result in material misstatements in our consolidated financial statements that could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and have a negative effect on the trading price of our stock.

Neither we nor BDO China Shu Lun Pan Certified Public Accountants LLP, or BDO China, our independent registered public accounting firm, has performed a comprehensive assessment of our internal control over financial reporting, as defined by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, for purposes of identifying and reporting material weaknesses and other control deficiencies. We are not currently required to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and therefore are not required to assess the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting. Further, BDO China has not been engaged to express, nor has it expressed, an opinion on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.

 

In connection with its audit of our consolidated financial statements as of, and for the year ended, December 31, 2016, BDO China informed us that it had identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting relating to our lack of sufficient qualified financial reporting and accounting personnel with an appropriate level of expertise to properly address complex accounting issues under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, or GAAP, and to prepare and review our consolidated financial statements and related disclosures to fulfill GAAP and SEC financial reporting requirements. As of December 31, 2017, we considered we were still in a transitional period to enhance the quality of our accounting and financial reporting function, we determined that the above mentioned material weakness had not been fully remediated. We have taken, and are continuing to take, remedial measures to improve the effectiveness of our controls, including by hiring additional accounting and finance personnel and by engaging outside consulting firms, although we now are also seeking to identify a qualified candidate to succeed our former Chief Financial Officer whose employment terminated effective January 24, 2018.

The existence of material weaknesses is an indication that there is a more than remote likelihood that a material misstatement of our financial statements will not be prevented or detected in a future period, and the process of designing and implementing effective internal controls and procedures will be a continual effort that may require us to expend significant resources to establish and maintain a system of controls that is adequate to satisfy our reporting obligations as a public company. We cannot assure you that the measures we take will be sufficient to remediate the material weakness identified by BDO China or that we will implement and maintain adequate controls over our financial processes and reporting in the future in order to avoid additional material weaknesses or controlled deficiencies in our internal control over financing reporting. If our remediation efforts are not successful or other material weaknesses or control deficiencies occur in the future, we may be unable to report our financial results accurately or on a timely basis, which could cause our reported financial results to be materially misstated and result in the loss of investor confidence and cause the trading price of Class A common stock to decline. Moreover, ineffective controls could significantly hinder our ability to prevent fraud.

Our auditor, as a registered public accounting firm operating in the PRC, is not permitted to be inspected by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, and consequently investors may be deprived of the benefits of such inspections.

BDO China is the independent registered public accounting firm that issued the audit report included in this report in connection with our consolidated financial statements as of, and for the years ended, December 31, 2017 and 2016. BDO China, as an auditor of companies that are traded publicly in the United States and a firm registered with the U.S. Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, or PCAOB, is required by the laws of the United States to undergo regular inspections by the PCAOB to assess its compliance with the laws of the United States and applicable professional standards. BDO China is located in the PRC. The PCAOB is currently unable to conduct inspections on auditors in the PRC without the approval of PRC authorities, and therefore BDO China, like other independent registered public accounting firms operating in the PRC, is currently not inspected by the PCAOB.

In May 2013 the PCAOB announced that it had entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on Enforcement Cooperation with the China Securities Regulatory Commission and the Ministry of Finance of China pursuant to which the Ministry of Finance established a cooperative framework between the parties for the production and exchange of audit documents relevant to investigations in both the PRC and the United States. More specifically, the Memorandum of Understanding provides a mechanism for the parties to request and receive from each other assistance in obtaining documents and information in furtherance of their investigative duties. In addition the PCAOB is engaged in continuing discussions with the China Securities Regulatory Commission and the Ministry of Finance to permit joint inspections in the PRC of audit firms that are registered with the PCAOB and to audit PRC companies whose securities are listed on U.S. stock exchanges.

 

The PCAOB’s inspections of firms outside of the PRC have identified deficiencies in audit procedures and quality control procedures, and such deficiencies may be addressed as part of the inspection process to improve future audit quality. The inability of the PCAOB to conduct inspections of BDO China with respect to its audit of our consolidated financial statements may make it more difficult for investors to evaluate BDO China’s audit procedures and quality control procedures by depriving investors of potential benefits from improvements that could have been facilitated by PCAOB inspections.

Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property

Our success depends on our ability to protect our intellectual property, including our SAPS and TEBO technologies.

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and trade secret protection for our intellectual property, including our SAPS and TEBO technologies and the design of our Ultra C equipment, as well as our ability to operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others. There can be no assurance that our patent applications will result in additional patents being issued or that issued patents will afford sufficient protection against competitors with similar technology, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around, or invalidated by third parties. Even issued patents may later be found unenforceable or may be modified or revoked in proceedings instituted by third parties before various patent offices or in courts. The degree of future protection for our intellectual property is uncertain. Only limited protection may be available and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. This failure to properly protect the intellectual property rights relating to our products and technologies could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The patent application process is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, and there can be no assurance that we or any of our future development partners will be successful in protecting our product candidates by obtaining and defending patents. These risks and uncertainties include the following:

In addition, we rely on the protection of our trade secrets and know-how. Although we have taken steps to protect our trade secrets and unpatented know-how, including entering into confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements with third parties and confidential information and inventions agreements with key employees, customers and suppliers, other parties may still obtain this information or may come upon this information independently. If any of these events occurs or if we otherwise lose protection for our trade secrets or proprietary know-how, the value of this information may be greatly reduced.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe upon our patents. If our technologies are adopted, we believe that competitors may try to match our technologies and tools in order to compete. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time consuming. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings, including our current suits, could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated, found to be unenforceable or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during litigation. In addition, any future patent litigation, interference or other administrative proceedings will result in additional expense and distraction of our personnel. Most of our competitors are larger than we are and have substantially greater resources, and they therefore are likely to be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation longer than we could. An adverse outcome in such litigation or proceedings may expose us to loss of our proprietary position.

 

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world, which could materially, negatively affect our business.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on our products or proprietary technologies in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States, including the PRC, can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing, and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license and may adversely affect our business.

If we are sued for infringing intellectual property rights of third parties, it will be costly and time consuming, and an unfavorable outcome in that litigation could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our success depends on our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our products without infringing upon the proprietary rights of third parties. Numerous U.S. and foreign-issued patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields in which we are developing products, some of which may contain claims that overlap with the subject matter of our intellectual property. A third party has claimed in the past, and others may claim in the future, that our technology or products infringe their intellectual property. In some instances third parties may initiate litigation against us in an effort to prevent us from using our technology in alleged violation of their intellectual property rights. The risk of such a lawsuit will likely increase as our size and the number and scope of our products increase and as our geographic presence and market share expand.

Any potential intellectual property claims or litigation commenced against us could:

 

Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending applications, unknown to us, that may later result in issued patents upon which our products or technologies may infringe. Similarly, there may be issued patents relevant to our products of which we are not aware.

Risks Related to Ownership of Class A Common Stock

The market price of Class A common stock has been and may continue to be volatile, which could result in substantial losses for investors purchasing our shares

Class A common stock only commenced trading on the Nasdaq Global Market, or Nasdaq, on November 3, 2017, and the market price of Class A common stock has been, and could continue to be, subject to significant fluctuations. The market price of Class A common stock may fluctuate significantly in response to numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control, including:

In recent years, the stock market in general, and Nasdaq in particular, has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to changes in the operating performance of the companies whose stock is experiencing those price and volume fluctuations.

As a newly public company, our stock price may be volatile, and securities class action litigation has often been instituted against companies following periods of volatility of their stock price. Any such litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

In the past, following periods of volatility in the overall market and the market price of a particular company’s securities, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against these companies. This litigation, if instituted against us, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of our management’s attention and resources.

 

An active trading market for Class A common stock may not be sustained.

Class A common stock has been listed on Nasdaq only since November 3, 2017, and we cannot assure you that an active trading market for Class A common stock will be sustained or maintained. The lack of an active market may impair your ability to sell your shares at the time you wish to sell them or at a price that you consider reasonable. The lack of an active market may also reduce the fair market value of your shares. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully develop or maintain a liquid market for Class A common stock.

We have broad discretion in the use of the net proceeds from our initial public offering and the concurrent private placement, and we may not succeed in using those net proceeds effectively.

In November 2017 we issued and sold 2,233,000 shares of Class A common stock in our initial public offering, or IPO, and an additional 1,333,334 shares of Class A common stock in a private placement, which we refer to as the concurrent private placement. We cannot specify with any certainty the particular uses of the net proceeds that we received from the IPO and the concurrent private placement. Our management has broad discretion in the application of these net proceeds, including working capital and other general corporate purposes, and we may spend or invest these proceeds in a way with which our stockholders disagree. The failure by management to apply these funds effectively could harm our business and financial condition. Pending their use, we may invest the net proceeds in a manner that does not produce income or that loses value.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or reports about us, our business or our market, or if they publish negative evaluations of Class A common stock or the stock of other companies in our industry, the price of our stock and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for Class A common stock will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If one or more of the analysts who cover us downgrade the Class A common stock or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, the Class A common stock price would likely decline. In addition, if one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of the Class A common stock or fails to publish reports about the Class A common stock on a regular basis, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which in turn could cause the Class A common stock price or trading volume to decline.

Requirements associated with being a public reporting company will increase our costs significantly, as well as divert significant company resources and management attention.

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the listing requirements of Nasdaq, and other rules and regulations of the SEC. We are working with our legal, independent accounting and financial advisors to identify those areas in which changes should be made to our financial and management control systems to manage our growth and our obligations as a public reporting company. These areas include corporate governance, corporate control, disclosure controls and procedures, and financial reporting and accounting systems. We have made, and will continue to make, changes in these and other areas. Compliance with the various reporting and other requirements applicable to public reporting companies will require considerable time, attention of management and financial resources. In addition, the changes we make may not be sufficient to allow us to satisfy our obligations as a public reporting company on a timely basis.

The listing requirements of Nasdaq require that we satisfy certain corporate governance requirements relating to director independence, distributing annual and interim reports, stockholder meetings, approvals and voting, soliciting proxies, conflicts of interest and a code of conduct. Our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to ensure that we comply with all of these requirements. The reporting requirements, rules and regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs and will make some activities more time-consuming and costly. These reporting requirements, rules and regulations, coupled with the increase in potential litigation exposure associated with being a public company, could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve as our directors or executive officers, or to obtain certain types of insurance, including director and officer liability insurance, on acceptable terms.

We have never paid and do not intend to pay cash dividends and, consequently, your ability to achieve a return on your investment will depend on appreciation in the price of Class A common stock.

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our capital stock. We currently intend to retain any future earnings to finance the operation and expansion of our business, and we do not expect to declare or pay any dividends in the foreseeable future. Accordingly, you may only receive a return on your investment in Class A common stock if the market price of Class A common stock increases.

Our ability to pay dividends on Class A common stock depends significantly on our receiving distributions of funds from our subsidiaries in the PRC. PRC statutory laws and regulations permit payments of dividends by those subsidiaries only out of their retained earnings, which are determined in accordance with PRC accounting standards and regulations that differ from U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The PRC regulations and our subsidiaries’ articles of association require annual appropriations of 10% of net after-tax profits to be set aside, prior to payment of dividends, as a reserve or surplus fund, which restricts our subsidiaries’ ability to transfer a portion of their net assets to us. In addition, our subsidiaries’ short-term bank loans restrict their ability to pay dividends to us.

 

The dual class structure of Class A common stock has the effect of concentrating voting control with our executive officers and directors, including our Chief Executive Officer and President, which will limit or preclude your ability to influence corporate matters.

Class B common stock has twenty votes per share and Class A common stock has one vote per share. As of March 19, 2018, stockholders who hold shares of Class B common stock, who consist principally of our executive officers, employees, directors and their respective affiliates, collectively held 78.8% of the voting power of our outstanding capital stock. Because of the twenty-to-one voting ratio between Class B and Class A common stock, holders of Class B common stock collectively will continue to control a majority of the combined voting power of Class A common stock and therefore be able to control all matters submitted to our stockholders for approval so long as the shares of Class B common stock represent at least 4.8% of all outstanding shares of Class A and Class B common stock. This concentrated control will limit or preclude your ability to influence corporate matters for the foreseeable future. This concentrated control could also discourage a potential investor from acquiring Class A common stock due to the limited voting power of such stock relative to the Class B common stock and might harm the market price of Class A common stock.

Future transfers by holders of Class B common stock will result in those shares converting to Class A common stock, subject to limited exceptions. The conversion of Class B common stock to Class A common stock will have the effect, over time, of increasing the relative voting power of those holders of Class B common stock who retain their shares in the long term.

Substantial future sales of shares by existing stockholders, or the perception that such sales may occur, could cause our stock price to decline.

If our existing stockholders, particularly our directors and executive officers, sell substantial amounts of Class A common stock in the public market, or are perceived by the public market as intending to sell substantial numbers of shares of Class A common stock, the trading price of Class A common stock could decline below the initial public offering price. As of March 19, 2018, only the shares of Class A common stock sold in the IPO and an additional 113,984 shares not subject to lock-up agreements were freely tradable in the public market. Holders of substantially all of the outstanding shares of Class A common stock, including all of our officers and directors, have entered into contractual lock-up agreements with the underwriters of the IPO pursuant to which they have agreed, subject to certain exceptions, not to sell or otherwise transfer any of their common stock or securities convertible into or exchangeable for shares of common stock until May 2, 2018. We and the lead underwriter in the IPO may, however, permit these holders to sell shares prior to the expiration of the lock-up agreements with the underwriters. On May 2, 2018, up to 13,169,506 shares of Class A common stock will be eligible for sale in the public market, including 9,600,558 shares held by directors, executive officers and other affiliates that will be subject to volume and other limitations under Rule 144 under the Securities Act.

Delaware law and provisions in our restated charter and bylaws could make a merger, tender offer or proxy contest difficult, thereby depressing the trading price of Class A common stock.

Our status as a Delaware corporation and the anti-takeover provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law may discourage, delay, or prevent a change in control by prohibiting us from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder for a period of three years after the person becomes an interested stockholder, even if a change of control would be beneficial to our existing stockholders. Our restated charter and bylaws contain provisions that may make the acquisition of our company more difficult, including the following:

 

As a Delaware corporation, we are also subject to provisions of Delaware law, including Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which limits the ability of stockholders holding more than 15% of our outstanding voting stock from engaging in certain business combinations with us. Any provision of our charter or bylaws or Delaware law that has the effect of delaying or deterring a change in control could limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their shares of Class A common stock, and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for Class A common stock.

Our restated charter designates the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware as the sole and exclusive forum for certain litigation that may be initiated by our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers or stockholders.

Our restated charter provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be the sole and exclusive forum for:

By becoming a stockholder in our company, you will be deemed to have notice of and have consented to the provisions of our restated charter related to choice of forum. The choice of forum provision in our restated charter may limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers, other employees, agents or stockholders, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in our restated charter to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.

 

Our management team has limited experience managing a public company.

Prior to the IPO, none of the current members of our management team had experience managing a publicly traded company, interacting with public company investors and complying with the increasingly complex laws pertaining to public companies. Our management team may not successfully or efficiently manage our transition to being a public company subject to significant regulatory oversight and reporting obligations under the federal securities laws and the scrutiny of securities analysts and investors. These new obligations and constituents will require significant attention from our management team and could divert their attention away from the day-to-day management of our business, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.

We are currently an “emerging growth company,” and the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies may make Class A common stock less attractive to investors.

We are currently an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act. For so long as we remain an emerging growth company, we are permitted, and intend, to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. These exemptions include reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation and exemptions from the requirements of holding a non-binding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved, not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and not being required to comply with any requirement that may be adopted by the PCAOB regarding mandatory audit firm rotation or a supplement to the auditor’s report providing additional information about the audit and the financial statements. We cannot predict whether investors will find the Class A common stock less attractive if we rely on these exemptions. If some investors find the Class A common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market, and more volatile trading price, for Class A common stock.

 

We will incur increased costs and demands upon management as a result of complying with the laws and regulations affecting public companies, particularly after we are no longer an “emerging growth company,” which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.

As a public company, and particularly after we cease to be an “emerging growth company,” we will continue to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses. We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities and Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, and the rules and regulations of Nasdaq. These requirements have increased and will continue to increase our legal, accounting and financial compliance costs and have made and will continue to make some activities more time consuming and costly. For example, we expect these rules and regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced policy limits and coverage or incur substantially higher costs to maintain the same or similar coverage. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve as our executive officers or on the board of directors, particularly to serve on the audit and compensation committees.

 

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we assess the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting annually and the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures quarterly. In particular, beginning with respect to the year ending December 31, 2018, Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or Section 404, will require our management to perform system and process evaluation and testing to allow it to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.

 

We are currently evaluating our internal controls, identifying and remediating deficiencies in those internal controls and documenting the results of our evaluation, testing and remediation. Please see “—Our management and auditors identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting that, if not properly remediated, could result in material misstatements in our consolidated financial statements that could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and have a negative effect on the trading price of our stock.”

 

Investor perceptions of our company may suffer if deficiencies are found, which could cause a decline in the market price of our stock. Irrespective of compliance with Section 404, any failure of our internal control over financial reporting could have a material adverse effect on our stated operating results and harm our reputation. If we are unable to implement these requirements effectively or efficiently, it could harm our operations, financial reporting, or financial results and could result in an adverse opinion on our internal controls from our independent registered public accounting firm.

 

In addition, changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure are creating uncertainty for public companies, increasing legal and financial compliance costs and making some activities more time consuming. These laws, regulations and standards are subject to varying interpretations, in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and, as a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices. We intend to invest resources to comply with evolving laws, regulations and standards, and this investment may result in increased general and administrative expense and a diversion of management’s time and attention from revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. If our efforts to comply with new laws, regulations and standards differ from the activities intended by regulatory or governing bodies, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and our business may be harmed.

 

Item 1B: Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2: Properties

 

We have occupied our current corporate headquarters in Fremont, California, since February 2008, under a lease that, as amended in March 2017, extends through March 2019. We conduct our research and development and manufacturing and service support operations in a facility of approximately 60,000 square feet, of which 36,000 square feet is dedicated to manufacturing, located in the Zhangjiang Hi­Tech Park in Shanghai, PRC. We have leased this facility since 2007. The lease terms and its payment terms are subject to modification and extension with Zhangjiang Group from time to time. The lease with Zhangjiang Group expired on December 31, 2017 and we are now leasing the property on a month-­to-­month basis as we negotiate the terms of the lease. In addition, we provide sales support and customer service operations from leased office space in Jiangying, PRC, Wuxi, PRC, and Icheon, Korea.

Item 3: Legal Proceedings

From time to time we may become involved in legal proceedings or may be subject to claims arising in the ordinary course of our business. Although the results of litigation and claims cannot be predicted with certainty, we currently believe that the final outcome of these ordinary course matters will not have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, financial condition or cash flows. Regardless of the outcome, litigation can have an adverse impact on us because of defense and settlement costs, diversion of management resources and other factors.

Item 4: Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5: Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

The Class A common stock has traded on NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol “ACMR” since November 3, 2017. Prior to that time, there was no public market for the Class A common stock. The table below lists the high and low sales prices of the Class A common stock, as reported by the Nasdaq Global Market.

 

	High	Low
Fourth Quarter 2017 (from November 3, 2017)	$8.48	$4.91

 

The Class B common stock is not listed or traded on any stock exchange.

Holders of Common Stock

As of March 19, 2018, there were 136 holders of record of shares of Class A common stock and 58 holders of record of shares of Class B common stock. The actual number of holders of Class A common stock is substantially greater and includes stockholders who are beneficial owners and whose shares are held of record by banks, brokers, and other financial institutions.

Dividends

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our capital stock. We intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings to support the operation of and to finance the growth and development of our business and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends in the foreseeable future. Any future determination to declare cash dividends on Class A and Class common stock will be made at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on various factors, including our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity requirements, capital requirements, level of indebtedness, contractual restrictions with respect to payment of dividends, restrictions imposed by applicable law, general business conditions and other factors that the board may deem relevant.

Our ability to pay dividends on Class A and Class B common stock depends significantly on our receiving distributions of funds from our subsidiaries in the PRC. PRC statutory laws and regulations permit payments of dividends by those subsidiaries only out of their retained earnings, which are determined in accordance with PRC accounting standards and regulations that differ from U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The PRC regulations and our subsidiaries’ articles of association require annual appropriations of 10% of net after-tax profits to be set aside, prior to payment of dividends, as a reserve or surplus fund, which restricts our subsidiaries’ ability to transfer a portion of their net assets to us. As of December 31, 2017, no cash was restricted under those PRC regulations or our subsidiaries’ articles because our subsidiaries had never generated net after-tax profits. In addition, our subsidiaries’ short-term bank loans restrict their ability to pay dividends to us.

Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans

The information required by this item will be set forth in the definitive proxy statement we will file in connection with our 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and is incorporated by reference herein.

Sales of Unregistered Securities

 

Set forth below is information regarding the shares of capital stock and options granted by us in 2017 that were not registered under the Securities Act of 1933.

The offers, sales, grants and issuances of the securities described in paragraphs (1) and (2) were deemed to be exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933 in reliance on Rule 701. The recipients of such securities were our employees, officers, directors, bona fide consultants and advisors and received the securities under our 1998 Stock Option Plan, written compensation contracts or our 2016 Omnibus Incentive Plan. Appropriate legends were affixed to the securities issued in these transactions. Each of the recipients of securities in these transactions had adequate access, through employment, business or other relationships, to information about us.

 

 

There has been no material change in the planned use of IPO proceeds from that described in the final prospectus filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Rule 424(b)(4) under the Securities Act of 1933 on November 3, 2017.

 

To date we have applied $7.8 million of the proceeds to purchase inventories and $1.0 million in our normal course of business operations.

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers

None.

Transfer Agent

The transfer agent and registrar for the Class A common stock and the Class B common stock is Computershare Trust Company, N.A.

Item 6: Selected Financial Data

 

Not applicable.

 

 

Item 7: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included in this report.  In addition to historical information, the following discussion contains forward-looking statements that involves risks, uncertainties and assumptions. See “Forward-Looking Statements and Statistical Data” at page 4 of this report. Please read “Item1A. Risk Factors” for a discussion of factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from our expectations.

Overview

We develop, manufacture and sell single-wafer wet cleaning equipment, which semiconductor manufacturers can use in numerous manufacturing steps to remove particles, contaminants and other random defects, and thereby improve product yield, in fabricating advanced integrated circuits, or chips. Our Ultra C equipment is designed to remove random defects from a wafer surface effectively, without damaging a wafer or its features, even at an increasingly advanced process node (the minimum line width on a chip) of 22 nanometers, or nm, or less. Our equipment is based on our innovative, proprietary Space Alternated Phase Shift, or SAPS, and Timely Energized Bubble Oscillation, or TEBO, technologies. We developed our proprietary technologies to enable manufacturers to produce chips that reach their ultimate physical limitations while maintaining product yield, which is the percentage of chips on a wafer that meet manufacturing specifications

We seek to market our wet processing equipment by first establishing a referenceable base of leading logic and memory chip makers, whose use of our products can influence decisions by other manufacturers. We believe this process will help us to penetrate the mature integrated circuit manufacturing markets and to build credibility with industry leaders. We have placed evaluation SAPS equipment with selected memory and logic chip customers since 2009 and recognized revenue from SAPS equipment since 2011. Using a similar “demo-to-sales” process, we began placing TEBO evaluation equipment with selected customers in 2016 and recognized revenue from our initial sale of TEBO equipment in December 2016. As of December 31, 2017, we had sold and deployed more than 30 single-wafer wet cleaning tools. We recognized revenue from the selected customers’ purchases of single-wafer wet cleaning equipment totaling $27.1 million, or 74.2% of our revenue, in 2017 and $21.5 million, or 78.4% of our revenue, in 2016.

We market and sell our products worldwide using a combination of our direct sales force and third-party representatives. We employ direct sales teams in Asia, Europe and North America, and have located these teams near our customers, primarily in the People’s Republic of China, or PRC, Korea, Taiwan and the United States. To supplement our direct sales teams, we have contacts with several independent sales representatives in the PRC, Taiwan and Korea. We also provide after-sales services to our customers by installing new replacement parts as well as making small scale modifications to improve our customers’ product yields.

We established our operational center in Shanghai in 2006 to help us establish and build relationships with chip manufacturers in China and throughout Asia. In addition to our SAPS and TEBO tools, we offer a range of custom-made wafer assembly and packaging equipment, such as coaters and developers, to wafer assembly and packaging factories, principally in the PRC.

Corporate Background

 

Recent Equity Transactions

Issuance of Warrant

In December 2016 Shengxin (Shanghai) Management Consulting Limited Partnership, or SMC, delivered to our subsidiary ACM Shanghai 20,123,500 RMB (approximately $3.0 million as of the date of funding) in cash, which we refer to as the SMC Investment, for potential investment pursuant to terms to be subsequently negotiated. SMC is a PRC limited partnership owned by Jian Wang, our Vice President, Research and Development and the brother of our Chair of the Board, Chief Executive Officer and President, David H. Wang, and other employees of ACM Shanghai. In March 2017 we issued to SMC a warrant exercisable to purchase 397,502 shares of Class A common stock at a price of $7.50 per share, for a total exercise price of approximately $3.0 million. The warrant may be exercised for cash or on a cashless basis, at the option of SMC, at any time on or before May 17, 2023 to acquire all, but not less than all, of the shares of Class A common stock subject to the warrant.

In connection with the completion of IPO on November 2, 2017, we issued a five-year warrant to Roth Capital Partners, LLC, the Company's IPO underwriter, up to 80,000 shares ("Underwriter's Warrant) of the Company's Class A common stock at the exercise price of $6.16. The Underwriter's Warrant is immediately exercisable and expires on November 1, 2022. 

 

Acquisition of Outstanding Minority Interests in Our Operating Company

Until August 31, 2017, ACM Research owned 62.87% of the outstanding equity interests in ACM Shanghai and three PRC-based third-party investors held the remaining 37.13% of equity interests, which were reflected as “non-controlling interests” in our consolidated balance sheets and related notes. We took the following actions in order to enable ACM Research to acquire, consistent with requirements of arrangements previously entered into in connection with the investors’ acquisition of ACM Shanghai equity interests, the outstanding non-controlling interests in ACM Shanghai:

Since November 8, 2017, ACM Research has owned all of the outstanding equity interests in ACM Shanghai.

Strategic Investment in Key Supplier

Ninebell Co., Ltd., or Ninebell, which is located in Seoul, Korea, is the principal supplier of robotic delivery system subassemblies used in our single-wafer cleaning equipment. On September 6, 2017 we and Ninebell entered into:

In addition, under the ordinary share purchase agreement, Ninebell granted us a preemptive right for all future issuances of equity-related securities by Ninebell and the founder of Ninebell, who is the only other equity holder of Ninebell, granted us a right of first refusal with respect to any future sales of his equity securities.

Key Components of Results of Operations

Revenue

We develop, manufacture and sell single-wafer wet cleaning equipment and custom-made wafer assembly and packaging equipment. Because we currently sell our capital equipment, or tools, to a small number of customers and we customize those tools to fulfill the customers’ specific requirements, our revenue generation fluctuates, depending on the length of the sales, development and evaluation phases:

 

Sales and Development. During the sale process we may, depending on a prospective customer’s specifications and requirements, need to perform additional research, development and testing to establish that a tool can meet the prospective customer’s requirements. We then host an in-house demonstration of the customized tool prototype. Sales cycles for orders that require limited customization and do not require that we develop new technology usually take from 6 to 12 months, while the product life cycle, including the initial design, demonstration and final assembly phases, for orders requiring development and testing of new technologies can take as long as 2 to 4 years. As we expand our customer base, we expect to gain more repeat purchase orders for tools that we have already developed and tested, which will eliminate the need for a demonstration phase and shorten the development cycle.

Evaluation Periods. When a chip manufacturer proposes to purchase a particular type of tool from us for the first time, we offer the manufacturer an opportunity to evaluate the tool for a period that can extend for 24 months or longer. We do not receive any payment on first-time purchases until the tool is accepted. As a result, we may spend between $1.0 and $2.0 million to produce a tool without receiving payment for more than 24 months or, if the tool is not accepted, without receiving any payment. Please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Our Industry—We may incur significant expenses long before we can recognize revenue from new products, if at all, due to the costs and length of research, development, manufacturing and customer evaluation process cycles.”

Purchase Orders. In accordance with industry practice, sales of our tools are made pursuant to purchase orders. Each purchase order from a customer for one of our tools contains specific technical requirements intended to ensure, among other things, that the tool will be compatible with the customer’s manufacturing process line. Until a purchase order is received, we do not have a binding purchase commitment. Our SAPS and TEBO customers to date have provided us with non-binding one- to two-year forecasts of their anticipated demands, and we expect future customers to furnish similar non-binding forecasts for planning purposes. Any of those forecasts would be subject to change, however, by the customer at any time, without notice to us.

Fulfillment. We seek to obtain a purchase order for a tool from three to four months in advance of the expected delivery date. Depending upon the nature of a customer’s specifications, the lead time for production of a tool generally will extend from two to four months. The lead-time can be as long as six months, however, and in some cases we may need to begin producing a tool based on a customer’s non-binding forecast, rather than waiting to receive a binding purchase order.

We expect our sales prices generally to range between $2.5 million and $5.0 million for SAPs tools and between $3.5 million and $6.5 million for TEBO tools. The sales price of a particular tool will vary depending upon the required specifications. We have designed equipment models using a modular configuration that we customize to meet customers’ technical specifications. For example, our Ultra C models for SAPS and TEBO solutions use modular configurations that enable us to create a wet-cleaning tool meeting a customer’s specific requirements, while using pre-existing designs for chamber, electrical, chemical delivery and other modules.

Because of the relatively large purchase prices of our tools, customers generally pay in installments. For a customer’s repeat purchase of a particular type of tool, the specific payment terms are negotiated in connection with acceptance of a purchase order. Based on our limited experience with repeat sales of SAPS and TEBO tools, we expect that we will receive an initial payment upon delivery of a tool in connection with a repeat purchase, with the balance being paid once the tool has been tested and accepted by the customer. Our sales arrangements for repeat purchases do not include a general right of return.

Since introducing SAPS technology in 2009, we have focused on selling SAPS-based tools and, beginning in 2016, TEBO-based tools. Our revenue from sales of single-wafer wet cleaning equipment totaled $27.1 million, or 74.2% of our revenue, in 2017 and $21.5 million, or 78.4% of our revenue, in 2016.

We have generated most of our revenue from a limited number of customers as the result of our strategy of initially placing SAPS- and TEBO-based equipment with a small number of leading chip manufacturers that are driving technology trends and key capability implementation. In 2017, 55.2% of our revenue was derived from four customers: SK Hynix Inc., a leading Korean memory chip company that accounted for 18.1% of our revenue; Shanghai Huali Integrated Circuit Research and Development Center Ltd., a public research consortia for the Chinese semiconductor industry that accounted for 14.1% of our revenue; JiangYin ChangDian Advanced Packaging Co. Ltd., a leading PRC foundry that accounted for 12.8% of our revenue; and Yangtze Memory Technologies Co., Ltd., a leading PRC memory chip company that, together with one of its subsidiaries, accounted for 10.2% of our revenue. In 2016 99.3% of our revenue was derived from four customers: Shanghai Huali Microelectronics Corporation, which accounted for 33.7% of our revenue; Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corporation, a leading PRC foundry that accounted for 25.0% of our revenue; SK Hynix Inc., which accounted for 24.0% of our revenue; and JiangYin ChangDian Advanced Packaging Co. Ltd., a leading PRC foundry that accounted for 16.6% of our revenue.

 

Based on our market experience, we believe that implementation of our equipment by one of our selected leading companies will attract and encourage other manufacturers to evaluate our equipment, because the leading company’s implementation will serve as validation of our equipment and will enable the other manufacturers to shorten their evaluation processes. We placed our first SAPS-based tool in 2009 as a prototype. We worked closely with the customer for two years in debugging and modifying the tool, and the customer then spent two more years of qualification and running pilot production before beginning volume manufacturing. We expect that the period from new product introduction to high volume manufacturing will be three years or less in the future. Please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Business—We depend on a small number of customers for a substantial portion of our revenue, and the loss of, or a significant reduction in orders from, one or more of our major customers could have a material adverse effect on our revenue and operating results. There are also a limited number of potential customers for our products.”

All of our sales in 2016 and 2017 were to customers located in Asia, and we anticipate that a substantial majority of our revenue will continue to come from customers located in this region for the near future. We have increased our sales efforts to penetrate the markets in North America and Western Europe.

We utilize the guidance set forth in the FASB’s ASC Topic 605, Revenue Recognition, regarding the recognition, presentation and disclosure of revenue in our financial statements. We recognize revenue when: persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; delivery has occurred and the major risks and remunerations of ownership have been transferred to the customer; collectability is probable; and the selling price is fixed or determinable, as described below under “—Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates—Revenue Recognition.”

We offer extended maintenance service contracts to provide services such as trouble-shooting or fine-tuning tools, and installing spare parts, following expiration of applicable initial warranty coverage periods, which for sales to date have extended from 12 to 36 months as described under “—Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates—Warranty.” A limited number of the single-wafer wet cleaning tools we have sold to date are no longer covered by their initial warranties. In 2016 and 2017, we received payments for parts and labor for service activities provided from time to time, but as of December 31, 2017 we had not yet entered into extended maintenance service contracts with respect to any of the tools for which initial warranty coverage had expired. We expect to enter into extended maintenance service contracts with customers as additional initial warranties expire, but we do not expect revenue from extended maintenance service contracts to represent a material portion of our revenue in the future.

The loss or delay of one or more large sale transactions in a quarter could impact our results of operations for that quarter and any future quarters for which revenue from that transaction is lost or delayed, as described under “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Our Industry—Our quarterly operating results can be difficult to predict and can fluctuate substantially, which could result in volatility in the price of Class A common stock.” It is difficult to predict accurately when, or even if, we can complete a sale of a tool to a potential customer or to increase sales to any existing customer. Our tool demand forecasts are based on multiple assumptions, including non-binding forecasts received from customers years in advance, each of which may introduce error into our estimates. Difficulties in forecasting demand for our tools make it difficult for us to project future operating results and may lead to periodic inventory shortages or excess spending on inventory or on tools that may not be purchased, as further described in “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Our Industry—Difficulties in forecasting demand for our tools may lead to periodic inventory shortages or excess spending on inventory items that may not be used.”

Cost of Revenue

Cost of revenue for capital equipment consists primarily of:

We are not party to any long-term purchasing agreements with suppliers. Please see “Item 1A. Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Business and Our Industry—Our customers do not enter into long-term purchase commitments, and they may decrease, cancel or delay their projected purchases at any time.”

As our customer base and tool installations continue to grow, we will need to hire additional manufacturing personnel. The rates at which we add customers and install tools will affect the level and time of this spending. In addition, because we often import components and spare parts from the United States, we have experienced, and expect to continue to experience, the effect of the dollar’s growth on our cost of revenue.

 

Gross Margin

Our gross margin was 47.2% in 2017 and 48.7% in 2016. Gross margin may vary from period to period, primarily related to the level of utilization and the timing and mix of purchase orders. We expect gross margin to be between 40% and 45% for the foreseeable future, with direct manufacturing costs approximating 50% to 55% of revenue and overhead costs totaling approximately 5% of revenue. The higher margin in 2016 and 2017 were primarily due to two systems manufactured under governmental subsidies (see “—PRC Government Research and Development Funding” below), which were sold for $1.8 million and $3.7 million in 2016. Costs associated with these systems were recorded as research and development expenses as these systems were research and development in nature and had not reached the final product manufacture stage. The related research and development expense was recorded as reduction of our research and development expense as incurred.

 

We seek to maintain our gross margin by continuing to develop proprietary technologies that avoid pricing pressure for our wet cleaning equipment. We actively manage our operations through principles of operational excellence designed to ensure continuing improvement in the efficiency and quality of our manufacturing operations by, for example, implementing factory constraint management and change control and inventory management systems. In addition, our purchasing department actively seeks to identify and negotiate supply contracts with improved pricing to reduce cost of revenue.

A significant portion of our raw materials are denominated in Renminbi, or RMB, while the majority of our purchase orders are denominated in U.S. dollars. As a result, currency exchange rates may have a significant effect on our gross margin. For further information, please see “Exchange Rate Information.”

Operating Expenses

We have experienced, and expect to continue to experience, growth in the dollar amount of our operating expenses, as we make investments to support the anticipated growth of our customer base and the continued development of proprietary technologies. As we continue to grow our business, we expect operating expenses to increase in absolute dollars.

Sales and Marketing

Sales and marketing expense accounted for 15.1% of our revenue in 2017 and 14.3% of our revenue in 2016. Sales and marketing expense consists primarily of:

Sales and marketing expense can be significant and may fluctuate, in part because of the resource-intensive nature of our sales efforts and the length and variability of our sales cycle. The length of our sales cycle, from initial contact with a customer to the execution of a purchase order, is generally 6 to 24 months.

During the sales cycle, we expend significant time and money on sales and marketing activities, including educating customers about our tools, participating in extended tool evaluations and configuring our tools to customer-specific needs. Sales and marketing expense in a given period can be particularly affected by the increase in travel and entertainment expenses associated with the finalization of purchase orders or the installation of tools.

We expect that, for the foreseeable future, sales and marketing expense will increase in absolute dollars, as we continue to invest in sales and marketing by hiring additional employees and expanding marketing programs in existing or new markets. We must invest in sales and marketing processes in order to develop and maintain close relationships with customers. We are making dollar-based investments in dollars in order to support growth of our customer base in the United States, and the relative strength of the dollar could have a significant effect on our sales and marketing expense.

 

Research and Development

Research and development expense accounted for 14.1% of our revenue in 2017 and 11.9% of our revenue in 2016. Research and development expense relates to the development of new products and processes and encompasses our research, development and customer support activities. Research and development expense consists primarily of:

Some of our research and development has been funded by grants from the PRC government, as described in “—PRC Government Research and Development Funding” below.

We expect that, for the foreseeable future, research and development expense will increase in absolute dollars and will range between 10% and 12% of revenue, as we continue to invest in research and development to advance our technologies. We intend to continue to invest in research and development to support and enhance our existing single-wafer wet cleaning products and to develop future product offerings to build and maintain our technology leadership position.

General and Administrative

General and administrative expense accounted for 16.1% of our revenue in 2017 and 9.8% of our revenue in 2016. General and administrative expense consists primarily of:

We expect that, for the foreseeable future, general and administrative expense will increase in absolute dollars, as we incur additional costs associated with growing our business and operating as a public company.

Stock-Based Compensation Expense

We grant stock options to employees and non-employee consultants and directors, and we accounts for those stock-based awards in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification, or ASC, Topic 718, Compensation—Stock Compensation and ASC Subtopic 505-50, Equity-Based Payments to Non-Employees, each as adopted by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB.

 

 

Cost of revenue and operating expenses during the periods presented below have included stock-based compensation as follows:

	2017	2016
	(in thousands)
Stock-Based Compensation Expense:
Cost of revenue	$21	$11
Sales and marketing expense	53	5
Research and development expense	50	5
General and administrative expense	1,499	362
	$1,623	$383

We recognized stock-based compensation expense to employees of $271,000 in 2017 and $92,000 in 2016. As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, there was $729,000 and $726,000 of total unrecognized employee share-based compensation expense, net of estimated forfeitures, related to unvested share-based awards, which are expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.72 years and 2.25 years, respectively.

We recognized stock-based compensation expense to non-employees of $1.4 million in 2017 and $291,000 in 2016. The fair value of each option granted to a non-employee is re-measured at each period end until the vesting date.

PRC Government Research and Development Funding

ACM Shanghai has received three grants from local and central governmental authorities in the PRC. The first grant, which was awarded in 2008, relates to the development and commercialization of 65nm to 45nm stress-free polishing technology. The second grant was awarded in 2009 to fund interest expense on short-term borrowings. The most recent grant was made in 2014 and relates to the development of electro copper-plating technology. PRC governmental authorities provide the majority of the funding, although ACM Shanghai is also required to invest certain amounts in the projects.

The PRC governmental grants contain certain operating conditions, and we are required to go through a government due diligence process once the project is complete. The grants therefore are recorded as long-term liabilities upon receipt, although we are not required to return any funds we receive. Grant amounts are recognized in our statements of operations and comprehensive income as follows:

Net Income Attributable to Non-Controlling Interests

Since 2006 we have conducted our business through our subsidiary ACM Shanghai, and we have financed our operations in part through sale of minority equity interests in ACM Shanghai. From January 1, 2015 to August 31, 2017, ACM Research owned 62.87% of the equity interests of ACM Shanghai and three non-controlling, unrelated investors held the remaining 37.13%. As described above under “—Recent Equity Transactions—Acquisition of Outstanding Minority Interests in Our Operating Company,” ACM Research (a) acquired an additional 18.77% equity interest from one of the minority investors as of August 31, 2017 and (b) acquired the remaining non-controlling interests with the other two minority investors on November 8, 2017.

 

How We Evaluate Our Operations

We present information below with respect to three measures of financial performance:

These financial measures are not based on any standardized methodologies prescribed by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, or GAAP, and are not necessarily comparable to similarly titled measures presented by other companies.

We have presented adjusted EBITDA, free cash flow and adjusted operating income (loss) because they are key measures used by our management and board of directors to understand and evaluate our operating performance, to establish budgets and to develop operational goals for managing our business. We believe that these financial measures help identify underlying trends in our business that could otherwise be masked by the effect of the expenses that we exclude. In particular, we believe that the exclusion of the expenses eliminated in calculating adjusted EBITDA and adjusted operating income (loss) can provide useful measures for period-to-period comparisons of our core operating performance and that the exclusion of property and equipment purchases from operating cash flow can provide a usual means to gauge our capability to generate cash. Accordingly, we believe that these financial measures provide useful information to investors and others in understanding and evaluating our operating results, enhancing the overall understanding of our past performance and future prospects, and allowing for greater transparency with respect to key financial metrics used by our management in its financial and operational decision-making.

Adjusted EBITDA, free cash flow and adjusted operating income (loss) are not prepared in accordance with GAAP, and should not be considered in isolation of, or as an alternative to, measures prepared in accordance with GAAP. There are a number of limitations related to the use of adjusted EBITDA rather than net income (loss), which is the nearest GAAP equivalent. Some of these limitations are:

 

The following table reconciles net income (loss), the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure, to adjusted EBITDA:

 

	Year Ended December 31,
	2017	2016
	(in thousands)
Adjusted EBITDA Data:
Net income (loss)	$(872)	$2,387
Interest expense, net	268	165
Income tax expense	547	595
Depreciation and amortization	271	187
Stock-based compensation	1,622	383
Adjusted EBITDA	$1,836	$3,717

Adjusted EBITDA in 2017, as compared with 2016, reflected a decrease of $3.3 million in net income offset by an increase of $1.2 million in stock-based compensation. We do not exclude from adjusted EBITDA expense reductions and non-operating other income attributable to PRC governmental grants because we consider and incorporate the expected amounts and timing of those grants in incurring expenses and capital expenditures. If we did not receive the grants, our cash expenses therefore would be lower, and our cash position would not be affected, to the extent we have accurately anticipated the amounts of the grants. For additional information regarding our PRC grants, please see “—Key Components of Results of Operations—PRC Government Research and Development Funding.”

The following table reconciles net cash provided by operating activities, the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure, to free cash flow:

 

	Year Ended December 31,
	2017	2016
	(in thousands)
Free Cash Flow Data:
Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities	$(8,101)	$(3,702)
Purchases of property and equipment, net of proceeds from disposals	(651)	(788)
Purchases of intangible assets	(115)	(22)
Free cash flow	$(8,867)	$(4,512)

Free cash flow in 2017, as compared with 2016, reflected, in addition to the factors driving net cash used by operating activities, (a) increases in accounts receivable offset by increases in accounts payable and (b) increases in stock-based compensation. Consistent with our methodology for calculating adjusted EBITDA, we do not adjust free cash flow for the effects of PRC government subsidies, because we take those subsidies into account in incurring expenses and capital expenditures.

Adjusted operating income (loss) excludes stock-based compensation from income (loss) from operations. Although stock-based compensation is an important aspect of the compensation of our employees and executives, determining the fair value of certain of the stock-based instruments we utilize involves a high degree of judgment and estimation and the expense recorded may bear little resemblance to the actual value realized upon the vesting or future exercise of the related stock-based awards. Furthermore, unlike cash compensation, the value of stock options, which is an element of our ongoing stock-based compensation expense, is determined using a complex formula that incorporates factors, such as market volatility, that are beyond our control. Management believes it is useful to exclude stock-based compensation in order to better understand the long-term performance of our core business and to facilitate comparison of our results to those of peer companies. The use of non-GAAP financial measures excluding stock-based compensation has limitations, however. If we did not pay out a portion of our compensation in the form of stock-based compensation, the cash salary expense included in operating expenses would be higher, which would affect our cash position. The following tables reflect the exclusion of stock-based compensation from line items comprising income (loss) from operations:

 

	Year Ended December 31,
	2017			2016
	Actual		Adjusted	Actual		Adjusted
	(GAAP)		(Non-GAAP)	(GAAP)		(Non-GAAP)
	(in thousands)
Revenue	$36,506	$—	$36,506	$27,371	$—	$27,371
Cost of revenue	(19,281)	(21)	(19,260)	(14,042)	(11)	(14,031)
Gross profit	17,225	(21)	17,246	13,329	(11)	13,340
Operating expenses:
Sales and marketing	(5,500)	(53)	(5,447)	(3,907)	(5)	(3,902)
Research and development	(5,138)	(50)	(5,088)	(3,259)	(5)	(3,254)
General and administrative	(5,887)	(1,499)	(4,388)	(2,673)	(362)	(2,311)
Income (loss) from operations	$700	$(1,623)	$2,323	$3,490	$(383)	$3,873

 

Adjusted operating loss in 2017, as compared with 2016, reflected an increase of $1.2 million in stock-based compensation expense.

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments and Estimates

The preparation of our consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions in applying our accounting policies that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses, and related disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities. We base these estimates and assumptions on historical experience, and evaluate them on an on-going basis to ensure that they remain reasonable under current conditions. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The accounting policies that reflect our more significant estimates, judgments and assumptions and that we believe are the most critical to aid in fully understanding and evaluating our reported financial results include the following:

Revenue Recognition

We utilize the guidance set forth in the FASB’s ASC Topic 605, Revenue Recognition, regarding the recognition, presentation and disclosure of revenue in our financial statements. We recognize revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; delivery has occurred and the major risks and remunerations of ownership have been transferred to the customer; collectability is probable; and the selling price is fixed or determinable.

In general, we recognize revenue when a tool has been demonstrated to meet the customer’s predetermined specifications and is accepted by the customer. If terms of the sale provide for a lapsing customer acceptance period, we recognize revenue as of the earlier of the expiration of the lapsing acceptance period and customer acceptance. In the following circumstances, however, we recognize revenue upon shipment or delivery, when legal title to the tool is passed to a customer as follows:

Customization, production, installation and delivery are essential elements of the functionality of our delivered tools, but the related services we offer, principally warranty services, are not essential to tool functionality. We treat the customization, production, installation and delivery of tools, together with the provision of related warranty and other services, as a single unit of accounting in accordance with the FASB’s ASC Subtopic 605-25, Revenue Recognition—Multiple Element Arrangements. In 2017 and 2016 all of our tools were sold in stand-alone arrangements.

We offer post-warranty period services, which consist principally of the installation and replacement of parts and small-scale modifications to the equipment. The related revenue and costs of revenue are recognized when parts have been delivered and installed, risk of loss has passed to the customer, and collection is probable. We do not expect revenue from extended maintenance service contracts to represent a material portion of our revenue in the future.

 

Stock-Based Compensation

We account for grants of stock options based on their grant date fair value and recognize compensation expense over the vesting periods. We estimate the fair value of stock options as of the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. Stock options granted to non-employees are subject to periodic revaluation over their vesting terms.

Stock-based compensation expense represents the cost of the grant date fair value of employee stock option grants recognized over the requisite service period of the awards (usually the vesting period) on a straight-line basis, net of estimated forfeitures. We estimate the fair value of stock option grants using the Black-Scholes option pricing model, which requires the input of highly subjective assumptions, including (a) the risk-free interest rate, (b) the expected volatility of our stock, (c) the expected term of the award and (d) the expected dividend yield.

 

 

 

 

For employee stock option grants made during the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the weighted-average assumptions used in the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the fair value of those grants were as follows:

 

	Year Ended December 31,
	2017		2016
Risk-free interest rate	2.21%-2.22%		2.02% -2.32%
Expected volatility	28.62%-29.18%		29.93%
Expected term (in years)	6.25		5.75-6.25
Expected dividend yield	0%		0%

For non-employee stock option grants made for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, the weighted-average assumptions used in the Black-Scholes option pricing model to determine the fair value of those grants were as follows:

 

	Year Ended December 31,
	2017		2016
Risk-free interest  rate	1.62%-2.43%		1.00% -2.25%
Expected volatility	28.71%-29.41%		29.93%
Expected term (in years)	3.58-6.25		2.11-6.24
Expected dividend yield	0%		0%

 

The following table summarizes by grant date the number of shares of common stock underlying stock options granted since January 1, 2015, as well as the associated per share exercise price and the estimated fair value per share of common stock on the grant date:

 

Grant Dates	Number of Common Shares Underlying Options Granted	Exercise Price per Common Share	Estimated Fair Value per Common Share
May 1, 2015	783,338	$1.50	$1.50
September 8, 2015	263,335	1.50	1.50
December 28, 2016	1,424,596	3.00	2.28
March 9, 2017	33,334	7.50	7.50
May 9, 2017	183,335	7.50	7.50
November 2, 2017	120,002	5.60	5.60

As of December 31, 2017, the unrecognized compensation cost related to outstanding options was $729,000 and is expected to be recognized as expense over a weighted-average of 1.77 years. As of December 31, 2016, the unrecognized compensation cost related to outstanding options was $726,000 and is expected to be recognized as expense over a weighted-average of 2.25 years.

As of December 31, 2017, we had outstanding stock options to acquire an aggregate of 3,372,292 shares of Class A common stock with an intrinsic value of $9.3 million. Of those outstanding options, (a) 1,765,112 shares had vested as of December 31, 2017, representing an intrinsic value of $6.4 million and (b) 1,607,180 shares were unvested, representing an intrinsic value of $2.9 million.

 

 

Inventory

Inventories consist of finished goods, raw materials, work-in-process and consumable materials. Finished goods are comprised of direct materials, direct labor, depreciation and manufacturing overhead. Inventory is stated at the lower of cost and net recognizable value of the inventory. The cost of a general inventory item is determined using the weighted average method. The cost of an inventory item purchased specifically for a customized tool is determined using the specific identification method. Market value is determined as the lower of replacement cost and net realizable value, which is the estimated selling price, in the ordinary course of business, less estimated costs to complete or dispose.

We assess the recoverability of all inventories quarterly to determine if any adjustments are required. We write down excess or obsolete tool-related inventory based on management’s analysis of inventory levels and forecasted 12-month demand and technological obsolescence and spare parts inventory based on forecasted usage. These factors are affected by market and economic conditions, technology changes, new product introductions and changes in strategic direction, and they require estimates that may include uncertain elements. Actual demand may differ from forecasted demand, and those differences may have a material effect on recorded inventory values.

Our manufacturing overhead standards for product costs are calculated assuming full absorption of forecasted spending over projected volumes, adjusted for excess capacity. Abnormal inventory costs such as costs of idle facilities, excess freight and handling costs, and spoilage are recognized as current period charges.

Allowance for Doubtful Accounts

Accounts receivable are reflected in our consolidated balance sheets at their estimated collectible amounts. A substantial majority of our accounts receivable are derived from sales to large multinational semiconductor manufacturers in Asia. We follow the allowance method of recognizing uncollectible accounts receivable, pursuant to which we regularly assess our ability to collect outstanding customer invoices and make estimates of the collectability of accounts receivable. We provide an allowance for doubtful accounts when we determine that the collection of an outstanding customer receivable is not probable. The allowance for doubtful accounts is reviewed on a quarterly basis to assess the adequacy of the allowance. We take into consideration (a) accounts receivable and historical bad debts experience, (b) any circumstances of which we are aware of a customer’s inability to meet its financial obligations, (c) changes in our customer payment history, and (d) our judgments as to prevailing economic conditions in the industry and the impact of those conditions on our customers. If circumstances change, such that the financial conditions of our customers are adversely affected and they are unable to meet their financial obligations to us, we may need to record additional allowances, which would result in a reduction of our net income.

Property, Plant and Equipment

Assets comprising property, plant and equipment are recorded at cost. Depreciation is recorded on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets and begins when the assets are placed in service. Betterments or renewals are capitalized when incurred. Maintenance and repairs with respect to an asset are expensed as incurred if they neither materially add to the value of the asset nor appreciably prolong its life. Assets comprising plant, property and equipment are reviewed each year to determine whether any events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of the asset may not be recoverable.

 

Intangible Assets

Intangible assets represent the fair value of separately recognizable intangible assets acquired in connection with our business operations. We evaluate intangibles for impairment on an annual basis or whenever events or circumstances indicate that an impairment may have occurred.

Valuation of Long-Lived Assets

Long-lived assets are evaluated for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstance indicate that the carrying value of an asset may not be fully recoverable or that the useful life is shorter than we had originally estimated. When these events or changes occur, we evaluate the impairment of the long-lived assets by comparing the carrying value of the assets to an estimate of future undiscounted cash flows expected to be generated from the use of the assets and their eventual disposition. If the sum of the expected future undiscounted cash flow is less than the carrying value of the assets, we recognize an impairment loss based on the excess of the carrying value over the fair value. No impairment charge was recognized in 2015, 2016 and 2017.

Income Taxes

Income taxes are accounted for using the liability method. Under this method, deferred income 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. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which these 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 would be provided for the deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that the related benefit will not be realized.

On a quarterly basis, we provide income tax provisions based upon an estimated annual effective income tax rate. The effective tax rate is highly dependent upon the geographic composition of worldwide earnings, tax regulations governing each region, availability of tax credits and the effectiveness of our tax planning strategies. We carefully monitor the changes in many factors and adjust our effective income tax rate on a timely basis. If actual results differ from these estimates, this could have a material effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We maintained a partial valuation allowance as of December 31, 2017 with respect to certain net deferred tax assets based on our estimates of recoverability. We determined that the partial valuation allowance was appropriate given our historical operating losses and uncertainty with respect to our ability to generate profits from our business model sufficient to take advantage of the deferred tax assets in all applicable tax jurisdictions.

The calculation of our tax liabilities involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex tax regulations. In accordance with the authoritative guidance on accounting for uncertainty in income taxes, we recognize liabilities for uncertain tax positions based on the two-step process. The first step is to evaluate the tax position for recognition by determining if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that the position will be sustained in audit, including resolution of related appeals or litigation processes, if any. The second step is to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than fifty-percent likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. We reevaluate these uncertain tax positions on a quarterly basis. This evaluation is based on factors including changes in facts or circumstances, changes in tax law, effectively settled issues under audit and new audit activity. Any change in these factors could result in the recognition of a tax benefit or an additional charge to the tax provision.

Interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions are recorded in the provision for income tax expense on the consolidated statements of operations.

Foreign Currency Translation

Our consolidated financial statements are presented in U.S. dollars, which is our reporting currency, while the functional currency of our subsidiaries in the PRC is RMB. Transactions in foreign currencies are initially recorded at the functional currency rate prevailing at the date of the transactions. Any difference between the initially recorded amount and the settlement amount is recorded as a gain or loss on foreign currency transaction in our consolidated statements of operations. Monetary assets and liabilities denominated in a foreign currency are translated at the functional currency rate of exchange as of the date of a consolidated balance sheet. Any difference is recorded as a gain or loss on foreign currency translation in the appropriate consolidated statement of operations. In accordance with the FASB’s ASC Topic 830, Foreign Currency Matters, we translate the assets and liabilities into U.S. dollars from RMB using the rate of exchange prevailing at the applicable balance sheet date and the consolidated statements of operations and cash flows are translated at an average rate during the reporting period. Adjustments resulting from the translation are recorded in stockholders’ equity as part of accumulated other comprehensive income.

 

The PRC government imposes significant exchange restrictions on fund transfers out of the PRC that are not related to business operations. To date these restrictions have not had a material impact on us because we have not engaged in any significant transactions that are subject to the restrictions.

Warranty

We have provided warranty coverage on our tools for 12 to 36 months, covering labor and parts necessary to repair a tool during the warranty period. We account for the estimated warranty cost as sales and marketing expense at the time revenue is recognized. Warranty obligations are affected by historical failure rates and associated replacement costs. Utilizing historical warranty cost records, we calculate a rate of warranty expenses to revenue to determine the estimated warranty charge. We update these estimated charges on a regular basis. The actual product performance and field expense profiles may differ, and in those cases we adjust our warranty accruals accordingly.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

The following description summarizes recent accounting pronouncements that we have adopted or will be required to adopt in the future.

In February 2018, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update, or ASU, No. 2018-02, Income Statement—Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, which provides financial statement preparers with an option to reclassify stranded tax effects within accumulated other comprehensive income to retained earnings in each period in which the effect of the change in the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (or portion thereof) is recorded. The amendments in this ASU are effective for all entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption of ASU 2018-02 is permitted, including adoption in any interim period for the public business entities for reporting periods for which financial statements have not yet been issued. The amendments in this ASU should be applied either in the period of adoption or retrospectively to each period (or periods) in which the effect of the change in the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is recognized. We are is currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of ASU No. 2018-02 on our consolidated financial statements.

In July 2017 the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-11, Earnings Per Share (Topic 260); Distinguishing Liabilities from Equity (Topic 480); Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): (Part I) Accounting for Certain Financial Instruments with Down Round Features, (Part II) Replacement of the Indefinite Deferral for Mandatorily Redeemable Financial Instruments of Certain Nonpublic Entities and Certain Mandatorily Redeemable Noncontrolling Interests with a Scope Exception, which addresses the complexity of accounting for certain financial instruments with down round features. Down round features are features of certain equity-linked instruments (or embedded features) that result in the strike price being reduced on the basis of the pricing of future equity offerings. Current accounting guidance creates cost and complexity for entities that issue financial instruments (such as warrants and convertible instruments) with down round features that require fair value measurement of the entire instrument or conversion option. For public business entities, the amendments in Part I of this update are effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. For all other entities, the amendments in Part I of this update are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020. We are currently evaluating the impact of adoption of ASU 2017-11.

In May 2017 the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-09, Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting, which provides guidance on determining which changes to the terms or conditions of share-based payment awards require an entity to apply modification accounting under Topic 718. The amendments in this ASU are effective for all entities for annual periods, and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in any interim period, for (a) public business entities for reporting periods for which financial statements have not yet been issued and (b) all other entities for reporting periods for which financial statements have not yet been made available for issuance. The amendments in this ASU should be applied prospectively to an award modified on or after the adoption date. We do not expect the adoption of ASU No. 2017-09 to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In February 2017 the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-05, Other Income —Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets (Subtopic 610-20): Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets, which clarifies the scope of nonfinancial asset guidance in Subtopic 610-20. This ASU also clarifies that derecognition of all businesses and nonprofit activities (except those related to conveyances of oil and gas mineral rights or contracts with customers) should be accounted for in accordance with the derecognition and deconsolidation guidance in Subtopic 810-10. The amendments in this ASU also provide guidance on the accounting for so-called “partial sales” of nonfinancial assets within the scope of Subtopic 610-20 and contributions of nonfinancial assets to a joint venture or other noncontrolled investee. The amendments in this ASU are effective for annual reporting reports beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. We do not expect the adoption of ASU No. 2017-05 to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

In January 2017 the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment, which removes Step 2 from the goodwill impairment test. An entity will apply a one-step quantitative test and record the amount of goodwill impairment as the excess of a reporting unit’s carrying amount over its fair value, not to exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to the reporting unit. The new guidance does not amend the optional qualitative assessment of goodwill impairment. A business entity that is a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filer must adopt the amendments in this ASU for its annual or any interim goodwill impairment test in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted for interim or annual goodwill impairment tests performed on testing dates after January 1, 2017. We do not expect the adoption of ASU No. 2016-18 to have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In November 2016 the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash, which requires that a statement of cash flows explain the change during the period in the total of cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. Therefore, amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. The amendments in this ASU do not provide a definition of restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. The amendments in this ASU are effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. We are currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of ASU No. 2016-18 on our consolidated financial statements.

In August 2016 the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update, or ASU, No. 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments, which addresses the following cash flow issues: (a) debt prepayment or debt extinguishment costs; (b) settlement of zero-coupon debt instruments or other debt instruments with coupon interest rates that are insignificant in relation to the effective interest rate of the borrowing; (c) contingent consideration payments made after a business combination; (d) proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims; (e) proceeds from the settlement of corporate-owned life insurance policies, including bank-owned life insurance policies; (f) distributions received from equity method investees; (g) beneficial interests in securitization transactions; and (h) separately identifiable cash flows and application of the predominance principle. The amendments in this ASU are effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and interim periods within those fiscal years and are effective for all other entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018 and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. We are currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of ASU No. 2016-15 on our consolidated financial statements.

In April 2016 the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Compensation—Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting, which simplifies several aspects of the accounting for employee stock-based payment transactions. The areas for simplification in ASU No. 2016-09 include the income tax consequences, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows. The amendments in this ASU will be effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016 and interim periods within those annual periods. The adoption of ASU No. 2016-09 did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In February 2016 the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842). The amendments in this update create Topic 842, Leases, and supersede the leases requirements in Topic 840, Leases. Topic 842 specifies the accounting for leases. The objective of Topic 842 is to establish the principles that lessees and lessors shall apply to report useful information to users of financial statements about the amount, timing and uncertainty of cash flows arising from a lease. The main difference between Topic 842 and Topic 840 is the recognition of lease assets and lease liabilities for those leases classified as operating leases under Topic 840. Topic 842 retains a distinction between finance leases and operating leases. The classification criteria for distinguishing between finance leases and operating leases are substantially similar to the classification criteria for distinguishing between capital leases and operating leases in the previous leases guidance. The result of retaining a distinction between finance leases and operating leases is that under the lessee accounting model in Topic 842, the effect of leases in the statement of comprehensive income and the statement of cash flows is largely unchanged from previous GAAP. The amendments in ASU No. 2016-02 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years for public business entities. Early application of the amendments in ASU No. 2016-02 is permitted. We are currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of ASU No. 2016-02 on our consolidated financial statements.

In November 2015 the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-17, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes. Topic 740, Income Taxes, requires an entity to separate deferred income tax liabilities and assets into current and noncurrent amounts in a classified statement of financial position. Deferred tax liabilities and assets are classified as current or noncurrent based on the classification of the related asset or liability for financial reporting. Deferred tax liabilities and assets that are not related to an asset or liability for financial reporting are classified according to the expected reversal date of the temporary difference. To simplify the presentation of deferred income taxes, the amendments in ASU No. 2015-17 require that deferred income tax liabilities and assets be classified as noncurrent in a classified statement of financial position. For public business entities, the amendments in this update are effective for financial statements issued for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and interim periods within those annual periods. The adoption of ASU No. 2015-17 did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

 

In July 2015 the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-11, Inventory (Topic 330): Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory. The amendments in this update require an entity to measure inventory within the scope of ASU No. 2015-11 (the amendments in ASU No. 2015-11 do not apply to inventory that is measured using last-in, first-out or the retail inventory method. The amendments apply to all other inventory, which includes inventory that is measured using first-in, first-out or average cost) at the lower of cost and net realizable value. Net realizable value is the estimated selling prices in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal and transportation. Subsequent measurement is uncharged for inventory measured using last-in, first-out or the retail inventory method. The amendments in ASU No. 2015-11 more closely align the measurement of inventory in GAAP with the measurement of inventory in International Financial Reporting Standards. ASU No. 2015-11 is effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The amendments in ASU No. 2015-11 should be applied prospectively with earlier application permitted as of the beginning of an interim or annual reporting period. The adoption of ASU No. 2015-11 did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements. The relevant descriptions have been included in the inventory accounting policy.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements—Going Concern. The amendments in this update require management to evaluate whether there are conditions and events that raise substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern for both annual and interim reporting. The guidance is effective for us for the annual period ended after December 15, 2016 and interim periods thereafter. Management performed an evaluation of the our ability to fund operations and to continue as a going concern according to ASC Topic 205-40, Presentation of Financial Statements—Going Concern. The adoption of ASU No. 2014-15 did not have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). ASU No. 2014-09 supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in “Revenue Recognition (Topic 605)”, and requires entities to recognize revenue when it transfers promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled to in exchange for those goods or services. The FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date in August 2015. The amendments in ASU No. 2015-14 defer the effective date of ASU No. 2014-09. Public business entities, certain not-for-profit entities, and certain employee benefit plans should apply the guidance in ASU No. 2014-09 to annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. Earlier adoption is permitted only as of annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period.Further to ASU No. 2014-09 and ASU No. 2015-14, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net) in March 2016, ASU No. 2016-10, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing in April 2016, ASU No. 2016-12, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients, and ASU No. 2016-20, Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, respectively. The amendments in ASU No. 2016-08 clarify the implementation guidance on principal versus agent considerations, including indicators to assist an entity in determining whether it controls a specified good or service before it is transferred to the customers. ASU No. 2016-10 clarifies guideline related to identifying performance obligations and licensing implementation guidance contained in the new revenue recognition standard. The updates in ASU No. 2016-10 include targeted improvements based on input the FASB received from the Transition Resource Group for Revenue Recognition and other stakeholders. It seeks to proactively address areas in which diversity in practice potentially could arise, as well as to reduce the cost and complexity of applying certain aspects of the guidance both at implementation and on an ongoing basis. ASU No. 2016-12 addresses narrow-scope improvements to the guidance on collectability, non-cash consideration, and completed contracts at transition. Additionally, the amendments in this ASU provide a practical expedient for contract modifications at transition and an accounting policy election related to the presentation of sales taxes and other similar taxes collected from customers. The amendments in ASU No. 2016-20 represents changes to make minor corrections or minor improvements to the Codification that are not expected to have a significant effect on current accounting practice or create a significant administrative cost to most entities. The effective date and transition requirements for ASU No. 2016-08, ASU No. 2016-10, ASU No. 2016-12 and ASU No. 2016-20 are the same as ASU No. 2014-09. The Company will adopt ASU No. 2014-09, ASU No. 2016-08, ASU No. 2016-10, ASU No. 2016-12 and ASU No. 2016-20 at January 1, 2018. The Company has substantially completed the implementation of these ASUs and has identified the necessary changes to its policies, business processes, systems and controls. Whilst the Company has finalized the analysis of its revenue contracts applying the above guidance, and will adopt FASB ASC Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, effective January 1, 2018, using the modified retrospective transition approach. Under this approach, FASB ASC Topic 606 would apply to all new contracts initiated on or after January 1, 2018. For existing contracts that have remaining obligations as of January 1, 2018, any difference between the recognition criteria in these ASUs and the Company's current revenue recognition practices would be recognized using a cumulative effect adjustment to the opening balance of accumulated deficit. The Company has concluded that its revenue recognition will remain the same as previously reported and will not have material impacts to its consolidated financial statements.

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth our results of operations for the periods presented, as percentages of revenue.

 

	Year Ended December 31,
	2017	2016
Revenue	100.0%	100.0%
Cost of revenue	52.8	51.3
Gross margin	47.2	48.7
Operating expenses:
Sales and marketing	15.1	14.3
Research and development	14.1	11.9
General and administrative	16.1	9.7
Total operating expenses, net	45.3	35.9
Income from operations	1.9	12.8
Interest expense, net	(0.7)	(0.6)
Other income (expense), net	(2.4)	(1.3)
Income (loss) before income taxes	(1.1)	10.9
Income tax (expense) benefit	(1.5)	(2.2)
Net income (loss)	(2.6)	8.7
Less: Net income (loss) attributable to non-controlling interests	(1.5)	4.9
Net income (loss) attributable to ACM Research, Inc.	(1.1)%	3.8%

Comparison of Year ended December 31, 2017 and 2016

Revenue

 

	Year ended December 31,		% Change
	2017	2016	2016 v 2017
	(in thousands)
Revenue	$36,506	$27,371	33%

 

The increase in revenue of $9.1 million for 2017 reflected increases in revenue of $5.6 million from single-wafer cleaning equipment, $3.0 million from advanced packaging equipment and $500,000 from service and parts. Our revenue for 2017 compared to 2016 reflected sales of $8.8 million to two new customers and an increase of $300,000 in sales to existing customers.

Cost of Revenue and Gross Margin

 

	Year Ended December 31,		% Change
	2017	2016	2016 v 2017
	(in thousands)
Cost of revenue	$19,281	$14,042	37.3%
Gross profit	$17,225	$13,329	29.2
Gross margin	47.2%	48.7%	(1.5)%