AWARE INC /MA/ - Quarter Report: 2008 June (Form 10-Q)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
Quarterly
Report Pursuant To Section 13 Or 15(d) Of The
Securities
Exchange Act of 1934
For
the quarter ended June 30, 2008
Commission
file number 000-21129
AWARE,
INC.
(Exact
Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
Massachusetts |
04-2911026
|
(State or
Other Jurisdiction of
Incorporation or
Organization)
|
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
|
40 Middlesex Turnpike,
Bedford, Massachusetts, 01730
(Address
of Principal Executive Offices)
(Zip
Code)
(781)
276-4000
(Registrant’s
Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
Indicate
by check whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for
the past 90 days. YES x NO o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting
company. See definition of "large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer",
and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check
one):
Large
Accelerated Filer o Accelerated Filer
x Non-Accelerated
Filer o Smaller
Reporting Company o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). YES o NO x
Indicate
the number of shares outstanding of the issuer’s common stock as of July 22,
2008:
Class
|
Number
of Shares Outstanding
|
Common Stock, par
value $0.01 per share
|
23,766,175
shares
|
AWARE,
INC.
FORM
10-Q
FOR
THE QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30, 2008
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Page
|
||
PART
I
|
FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
|
|
Item
1.
|
Unaudited
Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of
|
||
June
30, 2008 and December 31, 2007
|
3
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the
|
||
Three
and Six Months Ended June 30, 2008
|
||
and
June 30, 2007
|
4
|
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the
|
||
Three
and Six Months Ended June 30, 2008
|
||
and
June 30, 2007
|
5
|
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
6
|
|
Item
2.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial
|
|
Condition
and Results of Operations
|
11
|
|
Item
3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about
|
|
Market
Risk
|
16
|
|
Item
4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
17
|
PART
II
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
|
Item
1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
18
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
18
|
Item
2.
|
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of
|
|
Proceeds
|
28
|
|
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
28
|
Item
6.
|
Exhibits
|
29
|
Signatures
|
29
|
|
2
PART
I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
ITEM
1: CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
AWARE,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(in
thousands, except share data)
(unaudited)
June
30,
2008
|
December
31,
2007
|
|||||||
ASSETS
|
||||||||
Current
assets:
|
||||||||
Cash
and cash
equivalents
|
$ | 37,865 | $ | 1,806 | ||||
Short-term
investments
|
- | 36,249 | ||||||
Accounts
receivable,
net
|
5,694 | 7,661 | ||||||
Inventories
|
2,070 | 1,424 | ||||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current
assets
|
573 | 708 | ||||||
Total
current
assets
|
46,202 | 47,848 | ||||||
Property
and equipment,
net
|
7,723 | 7,872 | ||||||
Investments
|
- | 494 | ||||||
Other
assets,
net
|
135 | 169 | ||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 54,060 | $ | 56,383 | ||||
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
||||||||
Current
liabilities:
|
||||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$ | 954 | $ | 939 | ||||
Accrued
expenses
|
136 | 174 | ||||||
Accrued
compensation
|
1,118 | 1,135 | ||||||
Accrued
professional
|
233 | 156 | ||||||
Deferred
revenue
|
319 | 413 | ||||||
Total
current
liabilities
|
2,760 | 2,817 | ||||||
Long-term
deferred
revenue
|
330 | 330 | ||||||
Stockholders’
equity:
|
||||||||
Preferred
stock, $1.00 par value; 1,000,000 shares authorized,
none
outstanding
|
- | - | ||||||
Common
stock, $.01 par value; 70,000,000 shares authorized; issued
and
outstanding, 23,766,175 as of June 30, 2008 and 23,854,708 as
of
December 31, 2007
|
238 | 239 | ||||||
Additional
paid-in
capital
|
83,900 | 83,626 | ||||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(33,168 | ) | (30,629 | ) | ||||
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
50,970 | 53,236 | ||||||
Total
liabilities and stockholders’
equity
|
$ | 54,060 | $ | 56,383 |
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial
statements.
3
AWARE,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(in
thousands, except per share data)
(unaudited)
Three
Months Ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||||||||
Revenue:
|
||||||||||||||||
Product
sales
|
$ | 3,948 | $ | 3,771 | $ | 7,872 | $ | 7,236 | ||||||||
Contract
revenue
|
1,776 | 1,575 | 3,298 | 3,409 | ||||||||||||
Royalties
|
443 | 1,083 | 874 | 1,584 | ||||||||||||
Total revenue
|
6,167 | 6,429 | 12,044 | 12,229 | ||||||||||||
Costs
and expenses:
|
||||||||||||||||
Cost
of product sales
|
624 | 1,690 | 1,448 | 2,186 | ||||||||||||
Cost
of contract revenue
|
1,129 | 1,410 | 2,148 | 2,762 | ||||||||||||
Research
and development
|
3,511 | 2,650 | 7,039 | 5,206 | ||||||||||||
Selling
and marketing
|
1,186 | 999 | 2,155 | 1,872 | ||||||||||||
General
and administrative
|
1,285 | 1,144 | 2,478 | 2,260 | ||||||||||||
Total costs and
expenses
|
7,735 | 7,893 | 15,268 | 14,286 | ||||||||||||
Loss
from operations
|
(1,568 | ) | (1,464 | ) | (3,224 | ) | (2,057 | ) | ||||||||
Interest
income
|
315 | 503 | 698 | 1,008 | ||||||||||||
Loss
before provision for income taxes
|
(1,253 | ) | (961 | ) | (2,526 | ) | (1,049 | ) | ||||||||
Provision
for income taxes
|
4 | 7 | 13 | 17 | ||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (1,257 | ) | $ | (968 | ) | $ | (2,539 | ) | $ | (1,066 | ) | ||||
Net
loss per share – basic
|
$ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.04 | ) | $ | (0.11 | ) | $ | (0.05 | ) | ||||
Net
loss per share – diluted
|
$ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.04 | ) | $ | (0.11 | ) | $ | (0.05 | ) | ||||
Weighted
average shares – basic
|
23,869 | 23,715 | 23,875 | 23,687 | ||||||||||||
Weighted
average shares - diluted
|
23,869 | 23,715 | 23,875 | 23,687 |
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated financial
statements.
4
AWARE,
INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in
thousands)
(unaudited)
Six
Months Ended
|
||||||||
June
30,
|
||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
||||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (2,539 | ) | $ | (1,066 | ) | ||
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash
provided
by (used in) operating activities:
|
||||||||
Depreciation
and
amortization
|
457 | 426 | ||||||
Stock
based
compensation
|
718 | 487 | ||||||
Provision
for doubtful
accounts
|
(19 | ) | ||||||
Increase
(decrease) from changes in assets and liabilities:
|
||||||||
Accounts
receivable
|
1,986 | (128 | ) | |||||
Inventories
|
(646 | ) | (337 | ) | ||||
Prepaid
expenses
|
135 | 419 | ||||||
Accounts
payable
|
15 | 122 | ||||||
Accrued
expenses
|
22 | 28 | ||||||
Deferred
revenue
|
(94 | ) | (526 | ) | ||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
35 | (575 | ) | |||||
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
||||||||
Purchases
of property and
equipment
|
(274 | ) | (345 | ) | ||||
Sales
of
investments
|
38,743 | 10,255 | ||||||
Purchases
of investments
|
(2,000 | ) | (10,414 | ) | ||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
36,469 | (504 | ) | |||||
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
||||||||
Proceeds
from issuance of common
stock
|
337 | 306 | ||||||
Repurchase
of common
stock
|
(782 | ) | - | |||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
(445 | ) | 306 | |||||
Increase
(decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
36,059 | (773 | ) | |||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, beginning of period
|
1,806 | 8,571 | ||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents, end of
period
|
$ | 37,865 | $ | 7,798 |
The accompanying notes are an integral
part of the consolidated financial statements.
5
AWARE,
INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
(unaudited)
A) Basis of
Presentation
The
accompanying unaudited consolidated balance sheet, statements of operations, and
statements of cash flows reflect all adjustments (consisting only of normal
recurring items) which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair
presentation of financial position at June 30, 2008, and of operations and cash
flows for the interim periods ended June 30, 2008 and 2007. Certain
reclassifications have been made to the prior year financial statements to
conform to the current year presentation.
The
accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in
accordance with the instructions for Form 10-Q and therefore do not include all
information and footnotes necessary for a complete presentation of our financial
position, results of operations and cash flows, in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles. We filed audited financial statements
which included all information and footnotes necessary for such presentation for
the three years ended December 31, 2007 in conjunction with our 2007 Annual
Report on Form 10-K.
The
results of operations for the interim period ended June 30, 2008 are not
necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the year.
B) Fair Value
Measurements
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157 ("SFAS 157"), "Fair Value
Measurements". SFAS 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework
for measuring fair value in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States, and expands disclosures about fair value
measurements. We adopted the provisions of SFAS 157 as of January 1, 2008, for
our financial instruments. Although the adoption of SFAS 157 did not materially
impact our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flow, we are now
required to provide additional disclosures as part of our financial
statements.
SFAS 157
establishes a three-tier fair value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used
in measuring fair value. These tiers include: Level 1, defined as
observable inputs such as quoted prices in active markets; Level 2, defined as
inputs other than quoted prices in active markets that are either directly or
indirectly observable; and Level 3, defined as unobservable inputs in which
little or no market data exists, therefore requiring an entity to develop its
own assumptions.
For
recognition purposes, on a recurring basis we are required to measure available
for sale investments at fair value. Our available for sale
investments had a fair value of $36.7 million as of December 31, 2007 and were
included in short-term investments and investments on our consolidated balance
sheets. The fair value of these investments was determined using
quoted prices in active markets and is considered a Level 1
input. Changes in the fair value of these investments have
historically been insignificant. We had no available for sale
investments at June 30, 2008.
6
Our cash
and cash equivalents, including money market securities, are also classified
within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted
market prices.
C) Inventory
Inventories
are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value with cost being
determined by the first-in, first-out (“FIFO”) method. Inventory
reserves are established for estimated excess and obsolete inventory. Inventory
consists primarily of the following (in thousands):
June
30,
2008
|
December
31,
2007
|
|||||||
Raw
materials
|
$ |
2,055
|
$ |
1,424
|
||||
Finished goods |
15
|
-
|
||||||
Total
|
$ | 2,070 | $ | 1,424 |
D) Computation of
Earnings per Share
Basic earnings per share is computed by
dividing net income or loss by the weighted average number of common shares
outstanding. Diluted earnings per share is computed by dividing net
income or loss by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding plus
additional common shares that would have been outstanding if dilutive potential
common shares had been issued. For the purposes of this calculation,
stock options are considered common stock equivalents in periods in which they
have a dilutive effect. Stock options that are anti-dilutive are
excluded from the calculation.
Net loss
per share is calculated as follows (in thousands, except per share
data):
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
Six
Months Ended
June
30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$ | (1,257 | ) | $ | (968 | ) | $ | (2,539 | ) | $ | (1,066 | ) | ||||
Weighted
average common shares outstanding
|
23,869 | 23,715 | 23,875 | 23,687 | ||||||||||||
Additional
dilutive common stock equivalents
|
- | - | - | - | ||||||||||||
Diluted
shares outstanding
|
23,869 | 23,715 | 23,875 | 23,687 | ||||||||||||
Net
loss per share – basic and diluted
|
$ | (0.05 | ) | $ | (0.04 | ) | $ | (0.11 | ) | $ | (0.05 | ) |
For the
three month periods ended June 30, 2008 and 2007 potential common stock
equivalents of 238,039 and 1,546,096, respectively, were not included in the per
share calculation for diluted EPS, because we had a net loss and the effect of
their inclusion would be anti-dilutive. For the six month period ended June 30,
2008 and 2007 potential common stock equivalents of 448,568 and 1,517,117,
respectively, were not included in the per share calculation for diluted EPS,
because we had net losses and the effect of their inclusion would be
anti-dilutive.
7
For the
three month periods ended June 30, 2008 and 2007, options to purchase 4,455,998
and 2,285,575 shares of common stock, respectively, were outstanding, but were
not included in the computation of diluted EPS because the options’ exercise
prices were greater than the average market price of the common stock and thus
would be anti-dilutive. For the six month periods ended June 30, 2008
and 2007, options to purchase 3,932,798 and 2,399,575 shares of common stock,
respectively, were outstanding, but were not included in the computation of
diluted EPS because the options’ exercise prices were greater than the average
market price of the common stock and thus would be anti-dilutive.
E) Stock-Based
Compensation
The
following table presents stock-based employee compensation expenses included in
our unaudited consolidated statements of operations (in thousands):
Three
Months Ended
June
30,
|
Six
Months Ended
June
30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||||||||
Cost
of product sales
|
$ | 3 | $ | 2 | $ | 6 | $ | 4 | ||||||||
Cost
of contract revenue
|
26 | 43 | 60 | 79 | ||||||||||||
Research
and development
|
160 | 99 | 327 | 184 | ||||||||||||
Selling
and marketing
|
50 | 25 | 81 | 46 | ||||||||||||
General
and administrative
|
154 | 83 | 244 | 174 | ||||||||||||
Stock-based
compensation expense
|
$ | 393 | $ | 252 | $ | 718 | $ | 487 | ||||||||
We
estimate the fair value of stock options using the Black-Scholes valuation
model. This valuation model takes into account the exercise price of the award,
as well as a variety of significant assumptions. These assumptions used to
estimate the fair value of stock options include the expected term, the expected
volatility of our stock over the expected term, the risk-free interest rate over
the expected term, and our expected annual dividend yield. We believe that the
valuation technique and the approach utilized to develop the underlying
assumptions are appropriate in calculating
the fair values of our stock options granted in the three and six month periods
ended June 30, 2008 and June 30, 2007. For stock options issued prior to
December 31, 2007, we used the simplified method as promulgated by SAB 107 for
estimating the expected option term. For stock options issued subsequent to
December 31, 2007, we used the calculated historical term of stock options in
computing the expected option term. Estimates of fair value are not intended to
predict actual future events or the value ultimately realized by persons who
receive equity awards.
F) Business
Segments
We
organize the company as one segment and conduct our operations in the United
States.
We sell
our products and technology to domestic and international
customers. Revenues were generated from the following geographic
regions (in thousands):
8
Three
Months Ended
|
Six
Months Ended
|
|||||||||||||||
June
30,
|
June
30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2008
|
2007
|
2008
|
2007
|
|||||||||||||
United
States
|
$ | 4,897 | $ | 3,566 | $ | 8,898 | $ | 7,615 | ||||||||
Germany
|
856 | 1,735 | 2,371 | 2,740 | ||||||||||||
Rest
of
World
|
414 | 1,128 | 775 | 1,874 | ||||||||||||
$ | 6,167 | $ | 6,429 | $ | 12,044 | $ | 12,229 |
G) Income
Taxes
As of
December 31, 2007, we had federal net operating loss and research and
experimentation credit carryforwards of approximately $46.1 million and $12.2
million respectively, which may be available to offset future federal income tax
liabilities and expire at various dates from 2008 through 2027. In
addition, at December 31, 2007, we had approximately $11.2 million and $6.2
million of state net operating losses and state research and development and
investment tax carryforwards, respectively, which expire at various dates from
2008 through 2022.
Based on an analysis that we performed
under Internal Revenue Code Section 382 on our NOLs generated for the period
1997 through 2007, we have not experienced a change in ownership as defined by
Section 382, and, therefore, the NOLs are not currently under any Section 382
limitation.
H) Recent Accounting
Pronouncements
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157 ("SFAS 157"), "Fair
Value Measurements," which defines fair value, establishes guidelines for
measuring fair value and expands disclosures regarding fair value measurements.
SFAS 157 does not require any new fair value measurements but rather
eliminates inconsistencies in guidance found in various prior accounting
pronouncements. SFAS 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007. However, on February 6, 2008, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 157-b which defers the effective date of SFAS 157 for one year for
nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities that are recognized or
disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis. We
adopted SFAS 157 on January 1, 2008, except as it applies to those
nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities as noted in FSP FAS 157-b.
The partial adoption of SFAS 157 did not have a material impact on our
consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows, nor do we
believe that the adoption of FSP FAS 157-b will have a material impact on our
consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159 ("SFAS 159"), “The Fair Value
Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities”. SFAS 159 allows entities
to voluntarily choose to measure certain financial assets and liabilities at
fair value (“fair value option”). The fair value option may be elected on an
instrument-by-instrument basis and is irrevocable, unless a new election date
occurs. If the fair value option is elected for an instrument, SFAS 159
specifies that unrealized gains and losses for that instrument be reported in
earnings at each subsequent reporting date. SFAS 159 was effective on
January 1, 2008. We did not apply the fair value option to any of our
outstanding instruments and therefore, SFAS 159 did not have an impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
9
I) Share Repurchase
Program
On August
28, 2007, we announced a stock repurchase program to purchase up to $5 million
of our common stock, subject to market conditions and other factors. Any
purchases under our stock repurchase program may be made from time to time
without prior notice. The authorization to repurchase our stock expires on
December 31, 2008. Repurchases of common stock under this program included 9,107
shares in 2007, and 216,991 shares for a total cost of $0.8 million during the
three months ended June 30, 2008.
10
ITEM
2:
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of
Financial
Condition and Results of Operations
Cautionary
Statement for Purposes of the “Safe Harbor” Provisions of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995
Some
of the information in this Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements that
involve substantial risks and uncertainties. You can identify these
statements by forward-looking words such as “may,” “will,” “expect,”
“anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “continue” and similar
words. You should read statements that contain these words carefully
because they: (1) discuss our future expectations; (2) contain projections of
our future operating results or financial condition; or (3) state other
“forward-looking” information. However, we may not be able to predict
future events accurately. The risk factors listed in this Form 10-Q,
as well as any cautionary language in this Form 10-Q, provide examples of risks,
uncertainties and events that may cause our actual results to differ materially
from the expectations we describe in our forward-looking
statements. You should be aware that the occurrence of any of the
events described in these risk factors and elsewhere in this Form 10-Q could
materially and adversely affect our business.
Results
of Operations
Product
Sales. Product sales
consist primarily of revenue from the sale of hardware and software
products. Hardware products consist of DSL test and diagnostics
hardware, including systems, modules, and modems. Software products consist of
software products for biometric, medical imaging and digital imaging
applications, as well as DSL test and diagnostics software.
Product
sales increased 5% from $3.8 million in the second quarter of 2007 to $3.9
million in the current year quarter. As a percentage of total
revenue, product sales increased from 59% in the second quarter of 2007 to 64%
in the current year quarter.
For the
six months ended June 30, 2008, product sales increased 9% from $7.2 million in
2007 to $7.9 million in 2008. As a percentage of total revenue, product sales
increased from 59% in the first six months of 2007 to 65% in the corresponding
period of 2008.
For the
three and six month periods, the dollar increase in product sales was primarily
due to an increase in revenue from the sale of biometric software, which was
partially offset by a decrease in revenue from the sale of test and diagnostic
hardware and software.
Contract
Revenue. Contract revenue consists of patent,
license and engineering service fees that we receive under agreements relating
to Aware’s patents, DSL technology, DSL test and diagnostic technology, and
biometrics technology.
Contract
revenue increased 13% from $1.6 million in the second quarter of 2007 to $1.8
million in the current year quarter. As a percentage of total
revenue, contract revenue increased from 25% in the second quarter of 2007 to
29% in the current year quarter. The dollar increase in contract revenue was due
to higher revenue from biometrics technology contracts, which was partially
offset by a decrease in revenue from DSL technology contracts. DSL contract
revenue was lower because we performed less engineering services for existing
customers, and we were unable to sign contracts with new customers.
11
For the
six months ended June 30, 2008, contract revenue decreased 3% from $3.4 million
in 2007 to $3.3 million in 2008. As a percentage of total revenue, contract
revenue decreased from 28% in the first six months of 2007 to 27% in the
corresponding period of 2008. The dollar decrease in contract revenue was
primarily due to decreased revenue from DSL technology contracts, which was
mostly offset by higher revenue from biometrics technology
contracts.
While we
believe that the transition to ADSL2+ and VDSL2 technology increases the value
proposition of our technology, some existing and prospective DSL chipset
licensees have continued to be reluctant to begin new development projects given
a difficult and uncertain environment in the semiconductor and
telecommunications industries, and intense ADSL chipset competition and falling
chipset prices.
During
the last several years, customers and potential customers cautiously evaluated
new chipset projects or delayed or cancelled projects in the face of such
conditions. Moreover, some of our existing customers have recently decided to
exit the DSL chipset business altogether. During the first quarter of
2008, one of our unannounced DSL licensees notified us that it wished to
terminate an ongoing development project with us as a result of its sale of
certain DSL assets to another company.
On July 15, 2008, we filed a lawsuit against this licensee seeking
damages for breach of contract. In July 2008, Thomson, another one of
our DSL licensees, announced that it was discontinuing its silicon solutions
business. As a result of these customer actions, we do not expect to generate
additional revenue from these DSL licensing contracts.
Royalties. Royalties
consist of royalty payments that we receive under licensing
agreements. We receive royalties from customers for the right to use
our patents and technology in their chipsets or solutions.
Royalties
decreased 59% from $1.1 million in the second quarter of 2007 to $0.4 million in
the current year quarter. As a percentage of total revenue, royalties decreased
from 17% in the second quarter of 2007 to 7% in the current year
quarter.
For the
six months ended June 30, 2008, royalties decreased 45% from $1.6 million in
2007 to $0.9 million in 2008. As a percentage of total revenue, royalties
decreased from 13% in the first six months of 2007 to 7% in the corresponding
period of 2008.
For the
three and six month periods, the dollar decrease in royalties was primarily due
to a decrease in ADSL royalties, and to a lesser degree, to a decrease in VDSL
and medical imaging royalties.
Our
royalty revenue comes predominantly from ADSL chipset sales by Ikanos
Communications, Inc. (“Ikanos”), and Infineon Technologies AG
(“Infineon”). Despite steady growth of worldwide ADSL subscribers
over the last several years, the availability of ADSL chipsets from a number of
suppliers and intense competition among those suppliers has caused chipset
prices to steadily decline. We are uncertain how the transition to
ADSL2+ and VDSL2 will impact our customers in the near term, how quickly sales
of our customers’ chipsets will increase and whether such increases will
contribute meaningful royalties to us.
Cost of Product
Sales. Cost of product sales consists primarily of the cost of
hardware product sales. The cost of software product sales is
minimal.
Cost of
product sales decreased 63% from $1.7 million in the second quarter of 2007 to
$0.6 million in the current year quarter. As a percentage of product
sales, cost of product sales decreased from 45% in the second quarter of 2007 to
16% in the current year quarter, which resulted in gross margins on product
sales increasing from 55% to 84%.
12
For the
six months ended June 30, 2008, cost of product sales decreased 34% from $2.2
million in 2007 to $1.4 million in 2008. As a percentage of product
sales, cost of product sales decreased from 30% in the first six months of 2007
to 18% in the corresponding period of 2008, which resulted in gross margins on
product sales increasing from 70% to 82%.
For the
three and six month periods, the dollar decrease in cost of product sales was
primarily due to lower sales of test and diagnostic hardware products. The
increase in gross margins on product sales was primarily due to a greater
proportion of software sales in the product sales mix.
Cost of Contract
Revenue. Cost of contract
revenue consists primarily of compensation costs for engineers and expenses for
consultants, technology licensing fees, recruiting, supplies, equipment,
depreciation and facilities associated with customer development
projects. Our total engineering costs are allocated between cost of
contract revenue and research and development expense. In a given
period, the allocation of engineering costs between cost of contract revenue and
research and development is a function of the level of effort expended on each.
Commencing in the fourth quarter of 2007, cost of contract revenue also includes
direct expenses for third party contractors and consultants for biometrics
technology contracts.
Cost of
contract revenue decreased 20% from $1.4 million in the second quarter of 2007
to $1.1 million in the current year quarter. Cost of contract revenue
as a percentage of contract revenue, was 90% in the second quarter of 2007 and
64% in the current quarter, which resulted in gross margins on contract revenue
increasing from 10% to 36%.
For the
six months ended June 30, 2008, cost of contract revenue decreased 22% from $2.8
million in the first six months of 2007 to $2.1 million in the corresponding
period of 2008. Cost of contract revenue as a percentage of contract
revenue decreased from 81% in the first six months of 2007 to 65% in the
corresponding period of 2008, which resulted in gross margins on contract
revenue increasing from 19% to 35%.
For the
three and six month periods, the dollar decrease in cost of contract revenue was
primarily due to lower DSL contract revenue. Lower cost of contract
revenue from DSL contracts was partially offset by increased cost of contract
revenue from biometrics contracts, which was due to increased revenue from such
contracts.
For the
three and six month periods, the increase in gross margins on contract revenue
was due to a greater proportion of higher-margin revenue from biometrics
contracts in the contract revenue sales mix.
Research and
Development Expense. Research and development
expense consists primarily of compensation costs for engineers and expenses for
consultants, recruiting, supplies, equipment, depreciation and facilities
related to engineering projects to improve our broadband intellectual property
offerings, as well as our software and hardware product technology. Our total
engineering costs are allocated between cost of contract revenue and research
and development expense. In a given period, the allocation of
engineering costs between cost of contract revenue and research and development
is a function of the level of effort expended on each.
Research
and development expenses increased 32% from $2.7 million in the second quarter
of 2007 to $3.5 million in the current year quarter. As a percentage of total
revenue, research and development expense increased from 41% in the second
quarter of 2007 to 57% in the current year quarter.
13
Research
and development expenses increased 35% from $5.2 million in the first six months
of 2007 to $7.0 million in the first six months of 2008. As a
percentage of total revenue, research and development expense increased from 43%
in the first six months of 2007 to 58% in the corresponding period of
2008.
For the
three and six month periods, the dollar increase in research and development
expense was primarily due to a shift of engineering resources from DSL customer
contracts (i.e., cost of contract revenue) to internal development projects
(i.e., research and development expense). This resource shift reduced the amount
of engineering expenses we allocated to cost of contract revenue, which
increased research and development expense to reflect our increased focus on
internal projects. To a much lesser extent, the dollar increase in research and
development expense was also due to salary increases and higher stock-based
compensation expense in the three and six month periods in 2008.
Our
research and development spending was principally focused on improving our VDSL2
StratiPHY3™ technology and chips, developing home networking technology in
support of the International Telecommunications Union’s G.hn standard,
developing analog front-end solutions for broadband applications, developing
test and diagnostics hardware and software, and developing biometrics and
imaging software.
Selling and
Marketing Expense. Selling and marketing expense consists
primarily of compensation costs for sales and marketing personnel, travel,
advertising and promotion, recruiting, and facilities expense.
Sales and
marketing expense increased 19% from $1.0 million in the second quarter of 2007
to $1.2 million in the current year quarter. As a percentage of total
revenue, sales and marketing expense increased from 15% in the second quarter of
2007 to 19% in the current year quarter.
For the
six months ended June 30, 2008, sales and marketing expenses increased 15%, from
$1.9 million in 2007 to $2.2 million in 2008. As a percentage of total revenue,
sales and marketing expenses increased from 15% in the first six months of 2007
to 18% in the corresponding period of 2008.
For the
three and six month periods, the dollar increase in sales and marketing expense
was mainly attributable to salary increases, headcount growth in the sales
organization, increased sales commissions on higher biometrics software sales,
increased travel expenses, and higher stock-based compensation
expense.
General and
Administrative Expense. General and administrative expense
consists primarily of compensation costs for administrative personnel, facility
costs, bad debt, audit, legal, stock exchange and insurance
expenses.
General
and administrative expenses increased 12% from $1.1 million in the second
quarter of 2007 to $1.3 million in the current year quarter. As a percentage of
total revenue, general and administrative expense increased from 18% in the
second quarter of 2007 to 21% in the current year quarter.
14
For the
six months ended June 30, 2008, general and administrative expenses increased
10% from $2.3 million in 2007 to $2.5 million in 2008. As a percentage of total
revenue, general and administrative expenses increased from 18% in the first six
months of 2007 to 21% in the corresponding period of 2008.
For the
three and six month periods, the dollar increase in general and administrative
expense was mainly attributable to salary increases, higher stock-based
compensation expense and legal fees, and a one-time payment to a former
director.
Interest
Income. Interest income decreased 37% from $503,000 in the
second quarter of 2007 to $315,000 in the current year quarter. For
the six months ended June 30, 2008, interest income decreased 31%, from
$1,008,000 in 2007 to $698,000 in 2008.
For the
three and six month periods, the dollar decrease in interest income was
primarily due to a significant fall in money market interest rates during early
2008. The decrease was also due to a decision we made to liquidate our portfolio
of auction rate securities and longer term debt instruments in the first quarter
of 2008 and invest the proceeds into a lower-yielding, shorter-term, money
market fund.
Income
Taxes. We made no provision for income taxes in the first six months of
2007 and 2008 due to net losses incurred and the uncertainty of the timing of
profitability in future periods, except for $13,000 and $17,000 of state excise
tax paid in the first six months of 2008 and 2007, respectively. In
2002, we determined that due to our continuing operating losses as well as the
uncertainty of the timing of profitability in future periods, we should fully
reserve our deferred tax assets. As of June 30, 2008, our deferred
tax assets continue to be fully reserved. We will continue to
evaluate, on a quarterly basis, the positive and negative evidence affecting the
realizability of our deferred tax assets.
As of
December 31, 2007, we had federal net operating loss and research and
experimentation credit carryforwards of approximately $46.1 million and $12.2
million respectively, which may be available to offset future federal income tax
liabilities and expire at various dates from 2008 through 2027. In
addition, at December 31, 2007, we had approximately $11.2 million and $6.2
million of state net operating losses and state research and development and
investment tax carryforwards, respectively, which expire at various dates from
2008 through 2022.
Based on an analysis that we performed
under Internal Revenue Code Section 382 on our NOLs generated for the period
1997 through 2007, we have not experienced a change in ownership as defined by
Section 382, and, therefore, the NOLs are not currently under any Section 382
limitation.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
At June
30, 2008, we had cash, cash equivalents, short-term investments, and investments
of $37.9 million, which represents a decrease of $0.7 million from December 31,
2007. Cash provided by operations in the first six months of 2008 was
$35,000. The decrease in cash was primarily due to $0.3 million of
capital spending and $0.8 million of stock repurchases under a stock buyback
program we announced in 2007. These uses of cash were partially offset by $0.3
million of proceeds from the exercise of employee stock options.
Cash
provided by operations in the first six months of 2008 was primarily due to a
reduction of non-cash working capital items of $1.4 million, which was almost
entirely offset by a net loss of $2.5 million, adjusted for non-cash items
related to depreciation and amortization of $0.5 million, and stock based
compensation expense of $0.7 million. Capital spending was primarily related to
the purchase of computer hardware, and laboratory equipment used principally in
engineering activities.
15
While we
can not assure you that we will not require additional financing, or that such
financing will be available to us, we believe that our cash and cash equivalents
will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next twelve
months.
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157 ("SFAS 157"), "Fair
Value Measurements," which defines fair value, establishes guidelines for
measuring fair value and expands disclosures regarding fair value measurements.
SFAS 157 does not require any new fair value measurements but rather
eliminates inconsistencies in guidance found in various prior accounting
pronouncements. SFAS 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning after
November 15, 2007. However, on February 6, 2008, the FASB issued FSP
FAS 157-b which defers the effective date of SFAS 157 for one year for
nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities that are recognized or
disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring basis. We
adopted SFAS 157 on January 1, 2008, except as it applies to those
nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities as noted in FSP FAS 157-b.
The partial adoption of SFAS 157 did not have a material impact on our
consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows, nor do we
believe that the adoption of FSP FAS 157-b will have a material impact on our
consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
In
February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159 ("SFAS 159"), “The Fair Value
Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities”. SFAS 159 allows entities
to voluntarily choose to measure certain financial assets and liabilities at
fair value (“fair value option”). The fair value option may be elected on an
instrument-by-instrument basis and is irrevocable, unless a new election date
occurs. If the fair value option is elected for an instrument, SFAS 159
specifies that unrealized gains and losses for that instrument be reported in
earnings at each subsequent reporting date. SFAS 159 was effective on
January 1, 2008. We did not apply the fair value option to any of our
outstanding instruments and therefore, SFAS 159 did not have an impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
ITEM
3:
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Our
exposure to market risk relates primarily to our investment portfolio, and the
effect that changes in interest rates would have on that
portfolio. Our investment portfolio has included:
|
—
|
Cash
and cash equivalents, which consist of financial instruments with original
maturities of three months or less;
and
|
|
—
|
Investments,
which consist of financial instruments that meet the high quality
standards specified in our investment policy. This policy
dictates that all instruments mature in three years or less, and limits
the amount of credit exposure to any one issue, issuer, and type of
instrument.
|
16
We do not
use derivative financial instruments for speculative or trading
purposes. As of June 30, 2008, we had $37.9 million in cash and cash
equivalents primarily in money market accounts. Due to the short
duration of these financial instruments, we do not expect that an increase in
interest rates would result in any material loss to our investment portfolio. In
January 2008, we liquidated all of our auction rate securities and invested the
proceeds in a money market account. In April 2008, we liquidated the remainder
of our investment portfolio of debt instruments and invested the proceeds in a
money market account.
ITEM
4:
Controls
and Procedures
Our
management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer,
has evaluated our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the
quarterly period covered by this Form 10-Q and has concluded that our disclosure
controls and procedures are effective. They also concluded that there
were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during the quarterly period covered by this Form 10-Q that have materially
affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control
over financial reporting.
17
PART
II. OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM
1:
Legal
Proceedings
From time
to time we are involved in litigation incidental to the conduct of our
business. We are not party to any lawsuit or proceeding that, in our
opinion, is likely to seriously harm our business.
ITEM
1A:
Risk
Factors
Risk
Factors
Our
Quarterly Results are Unpredictable and May Fluctuate Significantly
Our
quarterly revenue and operating results are difficult to predict and may
fluctuate significantly from quarter-to-quarter due to the unpredictably of our
revenue components.
It is
difficult for us to make accurate forecasts of product
revenues. Product revenues consist of sales of test and diagnostics
hardware as well as biometrics, medical imaging and test and diagnostics
software. Sales of hardware and software products fluctuate based upon demand by
our customers which is difficult to predict. Since our product
revenues include the sales of hardware products which typically have lower gross
margins than our other sources of revenue, profitability is also difficult to
predict.
Contract
revenues are also unpredictable. Making accurate predictions of contract
revenues from new customers is difficult because the contract negotiation
process is lengthy, frequently spanning a year or more, and the fiscal period in
which a new agreement will be entered into, if at all, and the financial terms
of such an agreement are difficult to predict. Making accurate
predictions of contract revenues from existing customers is also difficult,
because such revenues are affected by the level of cooperation we receive from
customers; the level of engineering services desired by customers; the potential
of contract termination once a project starts, or customers may not pay us as
anticipated under our contracts.
It is
also difficult for us to make accurate forecasts of royalty
revenues. Royalties are recognized in the quarter in which we receive
a report from a customer regarding the shipment of integrated circuits in the
prior quarter, and are dependent upon fluctuating sales volumes and/or prices of
chips containing our technology, all of which are beyond our ability to control
or assess in advance.
Our
business is subject to a variety of additional risks, which could materially
adversely affect quarterly and annual operating results, including:
|
·
|
market
acceptance of broadband technologies we supply by semiconductor or
equipment companies;
|
|
·
|
the
extent and timing of new transactions with semiconductor
companies;
|
|
·
|
changes
in our and our customers’ development schedules and levels of expenditure
on research and development;
|
|
·
|
the
loss of a strategic relationship or termination of a project by a
customer;
|
18
|
·
|
equipment
companies' acceptance of integrated circuits produced by our
customers;
|
|
·
|
the
loss by a customer of a strategic relationship with an equipment company
customer;
|
|
·
|
announcements
or introductions of new technologies or products by us or our
competitors;
|
|
·
|
delays
or problems in the introduction or performance of enhancements or of
future generations of our
technology;
|
|
·
|
failures
or problems in our hardware or software
products;
|
|
·
|
price
pressure in the biometrics or test and diagnostics markets from our
competitors;
|
|
·
|
delays
in the adoption of new industry standards or changes in market perception
of the value of new or existing
standards;
|
|
·
|
competitive
pressures resulting in lower contract revenues or royalty
rates;
|
|
·
|
competitive
pressures resulting in lower software or hardware product
revenues;
|
|
·
|
personnel
changes, particularly those involving engineering and technical
personnel;
|
|
·
|
costs
associated with protecting our intellectual
property;
|
|
·
|
the
potential that customers could fail to make payments under their current
contracts;
|
|
·
|
ADSL
market-related issues, including lower ADSL chipset unit demand brought on
by excess channel inventory and lower average selling prices for ADSL
chipsets as a result of market
surpluses;
|
|
·
|
VDSL
market-related issues, including lower VDSL chipset unit demand brought on
by excess channel inventory and lower average selling prices for VDSL
chipsets as a result of market
surpluses;
|
|
·
|
hardware
manufacturing issues, including yield problems in our hardware platforms,
and inventory buildup and
obsolescence;
|
|
·
|
product
gross margin may be affected by various factors including, but not limited
to, product mix, product life cycle, and provision for excess and obsolete
inventory;
|
|
·
|
significant
fluctuations in demand for our hardware
products;
|
|
·
|
regulatory
developments; and
|
|
·
|
general
economic trends and other factors.
|
As a
result of these factors, we believe that period-to-period comparisons of our
revenue levels and operating results are not necessarily
meaningful. You should not rely on our quarterly revenue and
operating results to predict our future performance.
We
Experienced Net Losses
We had a
net annual loss during 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005, and a loss in the first
six months of 2008. We may experience losses in the future
if:
|
·
|
the
test and diagnostics, semiconductor, telecommunications or biometrics
markets decline;
|
|
·
|
new
and/or existing customers do not choose to use our software or hardware
products; or
|
|
·
|
new
and/or existing customers do not choose to use our intellectual property
for new chipset products or do not increase their revenues from sales of
chipsets with our technology.
|
19
Our
DSL Licensing and DSL Test and Diagnostic Businesses Depend Upon a Limited
Number of Customers, Therefore We Derive a Significant Amount of Revenue from a
Small Number of Customers
There are
a relatively limited number of companies to which we can sell our DSL technology
and OEM equipment companies to which we can sell our DSL test and diagnostic
products in a manner consistent with our business model. If we fail to maintain
relationships with our current customers or fail to establish a sufficient
number of new customer relationships, our business could be seriously
harmed. In addition, our current and prospective customers may use
their superior size and bargaining power to demand terms that are unfavorable to
us.
Due to
the limited number of customers to which we can license or sell our DSL
technology and DSL hardware and software products, we derive a significant
amount of revenue from a small number of customers. In 2007, we
derived approximately 19%, 16%, and 10% of our total revenue from Infineon,
Spirent, and Alcatel, respectively. In 2006, we derived approximately 26% and
20% of our total revenue from Infineon and ADI/Ikanos,
respectively. On February 17, 2006 ADI sold its ADSL business
relating to Aware technology to Ikanos and Ikanos replaced ADI as an Aware
customer. In 2005, we derived approximately 30% and 20% of our total
revenue from Infineon and ADI, respectively.
Our
Business is Subject to Rapid Technological Change
The
semiconductor and telecommunications industries for high-speed network access
technologies are characterized by rapid technological change, with new
generations of products being introduced regularly and with ongoing evolutionary
improvements. We expect to depend on our DSL technology and products
for a substantial portion of our revenue for the foreseeable
future. Therefore, we face risks that others could introduce
competing technology that renders our DSL technology and products less desirable
or obsolete. Also, the announcement of new technologies could cause
our customers or their customers to delay or defer entering into arrangements
for the use of our existing technology. Either of these events could
seriously harm our business. The biometrics industry is also subject
to rapid technological change and uncertainty.
We expect
that our business will depend to a significant extent on our ability to
introduce enhancements and new generations of our DSL and biometrics technology
and products as well as new technologies and products that keep pace with
changes in the telecommunications and broadband industries and that achieve
rapid market acceptance. We must continually devote significant engineering
resources to achieving technical innovations and product
developments. These developments are complex and require long
development cycles. Moreover, we may have to make substantial
investments in technological innovations and product developments before we can
determine their commercial viability. We may lack sufficient
financial resources to fund future development. Also, our customers
may decide not to share certain research and development costs with
us. Revenue from technological innovations, even if successfully
developed, may not be sufficient to recoup the costs of
development.
One
element of our business strategy is to assume the risks of technology
development failure while reducing such risks for our customers. In
the past, we have spent significant amounts on development projects that did not
produce any marketable technologies or products, and we cannot assure you that
it will not occur again.
20
We
Face Intense Competition from a Wide Range of Competitors
The
success of our DSL licensing business depends on the willingness and ability of
semiconductor manufacturers to design, build and sell integrated circuits based
on our intellectual property. The semiconductor industry is intensely
competitive and has been characterized by price erosion, rapid technological
change, short product life cycles, cyclical market patterns and increasing
foreign and domestic competition.
As an
intellectual property supplier to the semiconductor industry, we face intense
competition from internal development teams within potential semiconductor
customers. We must convince potential customers to buy from us rather
than develop technology internally. Furthermore, our semiconductor
customers may choose to abandon joint development projects with us and develop
chipsets themselves without using our technology. In addition
to competition from internal development teams, we compete against other
independent suppliers of intellectual property. We anticipate intense
competition from suppliers of intellectual property for ADSL.
The
market for DSL chipsets is also intensely competitive. Our success
within the DSL industry requires that DSL equipment manufacturers buy chipsets
from our semiconductor customers, and that telephone companies buy DSL equipment
from those equipment manufacturers. Our customers’ chipsets compete
with products from other vendors of standards-based and DSL chipsets, including
Broadcom, Conexant, Ikanos, and ST Microelectronics.
The
markets for our DSL test and diagnostics hardware and software products are also
competitive and uncertain. We cannot assure you that phone companies
will purchase significant quantities of products to test and diagnose their DSL
networks, nor that if they do they will purchase products incorporating our
hardware and software. Our success as a supplier of hardware and
software products for DSL test and diagnostics depends on the willingness and
ability of OEM customers to design, build and sell automated test heads,
hand-held testers, and DSLAMs that incorporate or work with our
products.
Our DSL
licensing and DSL test and diagnostic revenues are dependent upon the success of
ADSL and VDSL services. ADSL and VDSL services offered over copper telephone
networks also compete with alternative broadband transmission technologies that
use other network architectures. Alternative technologies that use
other network architectures to provide high-speed data service include cable
modems using cable networks, wireless solutions using wireless networks, and
optics technology using fiber optic networks. These alternative broadband
transmission technologies may be more successful than ADSL or VDSL and we may
not be able to participate in the markets involving these alternative
technologies.
Many of
our DSL competitors, including our customers’ competitors, have significantly
greater financial, technological, manufacturing, marketing and personnel
resources than we do. Some of these competitors include Broadcom, Conexant, and
ST Microelectronics in our DSL licensing business; and JDS Uniphase and Sunrise
Communications in our DSL test and diagnostic business.
Also, the
markets for our biometrics, medical and digital imaging software products are
competitive and uncertain. Many of our biometric software competitors have
significantly greater financial, technological, marketing and personnel
resources than we do. Also, we face intense competition from internal
development teams within potential customers. We must convince
potential customers to purchase from us rather than develop software
internally. Furthermore, customers, who have already purchased from
us, may choose to stop purchasing our software and develop their own
software.
21
We may be
unable to compete successfully in our DSL licensing, DSL test and diagnostics,
and biometrics and imaging businesses, and our competitive position may be
adversely affected in the future by one or more of the factors described in this
section.
Our
Intellectual Property is Subject to Limited Protection
Because
we are a technology provider, our ability to protect our intellectual property
and to operate without infringing the intellectual property rights of others is
critical to our success. We regard our technology as proprietary, and
we have approximately 52 U.S. patents and 118 foreign patents and a number of
pending patent applications. We also rely on a combination of trade
secrets, copyright and trademark law and non-disclosure agreements to protect
our unpatented intellectual property. Despite these precautions, it
may be possible for a third party to copy or otherwise obtain and use our
technology without authorization.
As part
of our agreements, we typically work closely with our customers, many of whom
are also our potential competitors, and provide them with proprietary know-how
necessary for their development of customized chipsets based on our DSL
technology. Although our agreements contain non-disclosure provisions
and other terms protecting our proprietary know-how and technology rights, it is
possible that, despite these precautions, some of our customers might obtain
from us proprietary information that they could use to compete with us in the
marketplace. Although we intend to defend our intellectual property
as necessary, the steps we have taken may be inadequate to prevent
misappropriation.
In the
future, we may choose to bring legal action to enforce our intellectual property
rights. Any such litigation could be costly and time-consuming for
us, even if we were to prevail. Moreover, even if we are successful
in protecting our proprietary information, our competitors may independently
develop technologies substantially equivalent or superior to our
technology. The misappropriation of our technology or the development
of competitive technology could seriously harm our business.
Our
technology, software or hardware may infringe the intellectual property rights
of others. A large and increasing number of participants in the
telecommunications and compression industries have applied for or obtained
patents. Some of these patent holders have demonstrated a readiness
to commence litigation based on allegations of patent and other intellectual
property infringement. Third parties may assert patent, copyright and
other intellectual property rights to technologies that are important to our
business. In the past, we have received claims from other companies
that our technology infringes their patent rights. Intellectual
property rights can be uncertain and can involve complex legal and factual
questions. We may infringe the proprietary rights of others, which
could result in significant liability for us. If we were found to
have infringed any third party’s patents, we could be subject to substantial
damages or an injunction preventing us from conducting our
business.
We
Have a Unique DSL Licensing Business Model
The
success of our DSL licensing products depends upon our ability to license our
technology to semiconductor and equipment companies, and our customers’
willingness and ability to sell products that incorporate our technology so that
we may receive meaningful royalties that are consistent with our plans and
expectations.
22
We face
numerous risks in successfully obtaining suitable customers on terms consistent
with our business model, including, among others:
|
·
|
we
must typically undergo a lengthy and expensive process of building a
relationship with a potential customer before there is any assurance of an
agreement with such party;
|
|
·
|
we
must persuade semiconductor and equipment manufacturers with significant
resources to rely on us for critical technology on an ongoing basis rather
than trying to develop similar technology
internally;
|
|
·
|
we
must persuade potential customers to bear development costs associated
with our technology applications and to make the necessary investment to
successfully manufacture chipsets and products using our technology;
and
|
|
·
|
we
must successfully transfer technical know-how to
customers.
|
Moreover,
the success of our business model also depends on the receipt of royalties from
customers. Royalties from our customers are often based on the selling prices of
their chipsets and products, over which we have little or no
control. We also have little or no control over our customers’
promotional and marketing efforts. They are not prohibited from
competing against us.
Our DSL
licensing business could be seriously harmed if we cannot obtain suitable
customers, if our current customers cancel or put on hold DSL programs utilizing
our technology, or if our customers do not successfully market and sell chipsets
or products incorporating our technology.
There
Has Been and May Continue to be a Cyclical Demand for DSL Chipsets, and There is
Intense Competition for DSL Chipsets, Which Has Caused Our Royalty Revenue to
Decline
The
royalties we receive are influenced by many of the risks faced by the DSL market
in general, including cyclical demand which may result in reduced average
selling prices (“ASPs”) for DSL chipsets during periods of surplus. In the
past, the DSL industry has experienced an oversupply of DSL chipsets, central
office or customer premises equipment. Excessive inventory levels led
to soft chipset demand, which in turn led to declining ASPs. ASPs have
also been under pressure because of intense competition in the DSL chipset
marketplace. As a result of the soft demand and declining ASPs for ADSL
chipsets, our royalty revenue has decreased substantially. Price decreases for
ADSL or VDSL chipsets, and the corresponding decreases in per unit royalties
received by us, can be sudden and dramatic. Pricing pressures may continue
during 2008 and beyond. Our royalty revenue may decline over the long
term.
The
Success of Our DSL Licensing Business Requires Acceptance of Our Technology by
Equipment Companies
The
success of our DSL licensing business is dependent on our ability to generate
meaningful royalties from our licensing arrangements with semiconductor
manufacturers. Our ability to generate such royalties is materially
affected by the willingness of equipment companies to purchase integrated
circuits that incorporate our technology from our customers. There
are other competitive solutions available for equipment companies seeking to
offer broadband communications products. We face the risk that
equipment manufacturers will choose those alternative solutions. Generally, our
ability to influence equipment companies’ decisions whether to purchase
integrated circuits that incorporate our technology is limited.
23
We also
face the risk that equipment companies that elect to use integrated circuits
that incorporate our technology into their products will not compete
successfully against other equipment companies. Many factors beyond
our control could influence the success or failure of a particular equipment
company that uses integrated circuits based on our technology. Even if equipment
companies incorporate chipsets based on our intellectual property into their
products, their products may not achieve commercial acceptance or result in
meaningful royalties to us.
The
Success of Our DSL Licensing Business Requires Telephone Companies to Install
DSL Service in Volume
The
success of our DSL licensing business depends upon telephone companies
installing DSL service in significant volumes. If telephone companies
do not install DSL service in significant volumes, or if telephone companies
install broadband service based on other technologies such as cable or
fiber-to-the-home, our DSL licensing business will be seriously
harmed.
The
Success of Our DSL Test and Diagnostic Products Depends On a Number of
Factors
Our
success in developing, introducing, selling, and supporting new and enhanced
test and diagnostic products depends upon a variety of factors, including timely
and efficient completion of hardware and software design and development,
implementation of manufacturing processes, and effective sales, marketing, and
customer service. Because of the complexity of our test and
diagnostic products, significant delays may occur between a hardware product's
initial introduction and commencement of volume production. If we are
unsuccessful in developing, introducing, selling and supporting new and enhanced
test and diagnostic products, our DSL test and diagnostic business could be
seriously harmed.
If
Our Test and Diagnostic Hardware and Software Products Have Quality Problems,
Our Business Could Be Harmed
If our
test and diagnostic products have actual or perceived reliability, quality,
functionality or other problems, we may suffer reduced orders, higher
manufacturing costs, inability to recognize revenue, delays in collecting
accounts receivable and higher service, support and warranty expenses or
inventory write-offs, among other effects. We believe that the acceptance,
volume production, timely delivery and customer satisfaction of our test and
diagnostic products is important to our future financial results. As a result,
any inability to correct any technical, reliability, parts shortages or other
difficulties or to manufacture and ship our test and diagnostic products on a
timely basis meeting customer requirements could damage our relationships and
reputation with current and prospective customers, which would harm our revenues
and operating results.
We
are Dependent On a Single Source Contract Manufacturer for the Manufacture of
Our DSL Hardware Products, the Loss of Which Would Harm Our
Business
We
currently depend on one contract manufacturer to manufacture our DSL hardware
products. If this company was to terminate its arrangement with us or fail to
provide the required capacity and quality on a timely basis, we would be unable
to manufacture our products until replacement contract manufacturing services
could be obtained. To qualify a new contract manufacturer, familiarize it with
our products, quality standards and other requirements, and commence production
is a costly and time-consuming process. We cannot assure you that we would be
able to establish alternative manufacturing relationships on acceptable
terms. Although we make reasonable efforts to ensure that our
contract manufacturer performs to our standards, our reliance on a single source
limits our control over quality assurance and delivery schedules. Defects in
workmanship, unacceptable yields, and manufacturing disruptions and difficulties
may impair our ability to manage inventory and cause delays in shipments and
cancellation of orders that may adversely affect our relationships with current
and prospective customers. As a result, our revenues and operating results
may be harmed.
24
Our
Manufacturing Systems May Not Be Adequate For Our DSL Test and Diagnostics
Hardware Product Offerings
Our
current manufacturing systems adequately address hardware products we are
currently manufacturing in limited volumes. Our manufacturing systems have
not been extensively tested under anticipated, more complex hardware products or
in volumes higher than that of our current hardware products. If our
manufacturing systems are inadequate or have other problems, our revenues and
operating results may be harmed.
We
are Dependent on Single Source Suppliers for Components in Our DSL Hardware
Products
We rely
on single source suppliers for components and materials used in our DSL hardware
products. Our dependence on single source suppliers involves several risks,
including limited control over pricing, availability, quality and delivery
schedules. Any delays in delivery of such components or shortages of such
components could cause delays in the shipment of our products, which could
significantly harm our business. Because of our reliance on these vendors, we
may also be subject to increases in component costs. These increases could
significantly harm our business. If any one or more of our single source
suppliers cease to provide us with sufficient quantities of our components in a
timely manner or on terms acceptable to us, we would have to seek alternative
sources of supply. We could incur delays while we locate and engage alternative
qualified suppliers and we might be unable to engage alternative suppliers on
favorable terms. We could incur substantial hardware and software redesign costs
if we are required to replace the components. Any such disruption or
increased expenses could harm our commercialization efforts and adversely affect
our ability to generate revenues.
Biometrics
Software Business Risks
Our
biometrics software business is subject to a variety of additional risks, which
could materially adversely affect quarterly and annual revenue and operating
results, including:
|
—
|
market
acceptance of our biometric technologies and
products;
|
|
—
|
changes
in contracting practices of government or law enforcement
agencies;
|
|
—
|
the
failure of the biometrics market to experience continued
growth;
|
|
—
|
announcements
or introductions of new technologies or products by our
competitors;
|
|
—
|
delays
or problems in the introduction or performance of enhancements or of
future generations of our
technology;
|
25
|
—
|
failures
or problems in our biometric software
products;
|
|
—
|
the
risk that current or potential customers might decide to develop their own
software rather than buy it from
us;
|
|
—
|
delays
in the adoption of new industry biometric standards or changes in market
perception of the value of new or existing
standards;
|
|
—
|
growth
of proprietary biometric systems which do not conform to industry
standards;
|
|
—
|
competitive
pressures resulting in lower software product
revenues;
|
|
—
|
personnel
changes, particularly those involving engineering, technical and sales and
marketing personnel;
|
|
—
|
costs
associated with protecting our intellectual
property;
|
|
—
|
litigation
by third parties for alleged infringement of their proprietary
rights;
|
|
—
|
the
potential that customers could fail to make payments under their current
contracts;
|
|
—
|
regulatory
developments; and
|
|
—
|
general
economic trends and other factors.
|
Biometrics
Services Business Risks
We began
to perform engineering services under biometric technology contracts in the
fourth quarter of 2007. Over the last several quarters, our
biometrics services business has contributed a more meaningful portion of
contract revenue. This nascent business is subject to additional risks, which
could materially adversely affect quarterly and annual revenue and operating
results, including:
|
—
|
our
ability to structure and price technology contracts in a manner that is
consistent with our business model;
|
|
—
|
our
ability to deliver contract milestones: i) in a timely and cost efficient
manner, and ii) in a form and condition acceptable to
customers;
|
|
—
|
the
risk that customers could terminate
projects;
|
|
—
|
the
risk that we rely substantially on third party contractors and consultants
to deliver contract milestones; and
|
|
—
|
the
potential that customers could fail to make payments under their
contracts.
|
We
Must Make Judgments in the Process of Preparing Our Financial
Statements
We
prepare our financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles and certain critical accounting polices that are relevant
to our business. The application of these principles and policies
requires us to make significant judgments and estimates. In the event
that judgments and estimates we make are incorrect, we may have to change them,
which could materially affect our financial position and results of
operations.
Moreover,
accounting standards have been subject to rapid change and evolving
interpretations by accounting standards setting organizations over the past few
years. The implementation of new standards requires us to interpret
and apply them appropriately. If our current interpretations or
applications are later found to be incorrect, our financial position and results
of operations could be materially affected.
26
If
We are Unable to Maintain Effective Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting,
Investors Could Lose Confidence In The Reliability of Our Financial Statements,
Which Could Result In a Decline in the Price of Our Common Stock
As a
public company, we are required to enhance and test our financial, internal and
management control systems to meet obligations imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002. Consistent with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and
regulations of the SEC, management's assessment of our internal controls over
financial reporting and the audit opinion of our independent registered
accounting firm as to the effectiveness of our controls is required in
connection with our filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K. If we are unable
to timely identify, implement and conclude that we have effective internal
controls over financial reporting or if our independent auditors are unable to
conclude that our internal controls over financial reporting are effective,
investors could lose confidence in the reliability of our financial statements,
which could result in a decrease in the value of our common stock. Our
assessment of our internal controls over financial reporting may also uncover
weaknesses or other issues with these controls that could also result in adverse
investor reaction.
Our
Stock Price May Be Extremely Volatile
Volatility
in our stock price may negatively affect the price you may receive for your
shares of common stock and increases the risk that we could be the subject of
costly securities litigation. The market price of our common stock
has fluctuated substantially and could continue to fluctuate based on a variety
of factors, including:
|
·
|
quarterly
fluctuations in our operating
results;
|
|
·
|
changes
in future financial guidance that we may provide to investors and public
market analysts;
|
|
·
|
changes
in our relationships with our
customers;
|
|
·
|
announcements
of technological innovations or new products by us, our customers or our
competitors;
|
|
·
|
changes
in DSL or biometrics market growth rates as well as investor perceptions
regarding the investment opportunity that companies participating in the
DSL or biometrics industry afford
them;
|
|
·
|
changes
in earnings estimates by public market
analysts;
|
|
·
|
key
personnel losses;
|
|
·
|
sales
of our common stock; and
|
|
·
|
developments
or announcements with respect to industry standards, patents or
proprietary rights.
|
In
addition, the equity markets have experienced volatility that has particularly
affected the market prices of equity securities of many high technology
companies and that often has been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating
performance of such companies. These broad market fluctuations may adversely
affect the market price of our common stock.
Our
Business May Be Affected by Government Regulations
The
extensive regulation of the telecommunications industry by federal, state and
foreign regulatory agencies, including the Federal Communications Commission,
and various state public utility and service commissions, could affect us
through the effects of such regulation on our customers and their
customers. In addition, our business may also be affected by the
imposition of certain tariffs, duties and other import restrictions on
components that our customers obtain from non-domestic suppliers or by the
imposition of export restrictions on products sold internationally and
incorporating our technology. Changes in current or future laws or
regulations, in the United States or elsewhere, could seriously harm our
business.
27
ITEM
2:
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
Period
|
(a)
Total
Number of
Shares
Purchased
|
(b)
Average
Price
Paid
per Share
|
(c)
Total
Number of Shares
Purchased
as Part of
Publicly
Announced Plans
or
Programs(1)
|
(d)
Maximum
Number (or Approximate Dollar
Value)
of Shares that
May
Yet Be Purchased
Under
the Plans
or
Programs
|
|||||
March
31, 2008, to June 30, 2008
|
216,991
|
$ |
3.60
|
226,098
|
$4,180,085
|
(1) On August 28, 2007, we issued
a press release announcing that our board of directors had approved the
repurchase from time to time through December 31, 2008 of up to $5,000,000 of
our common stock. During 2008 and 2007, we purchased 216,991 and 9,107 shares,
respectively, under this plan.
ITEM
4:
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
On May
21, 2008, we held our Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Annual
Meeting”). Matters voted on and the results of those votes are set
forth below:
(1)
|
Each
of Adrian F. Kruse and Edmund C. Reiter was elected to serve as a Class
III director of the Company for a term expiring at the annual meeting of
stockholders of the Company in 2011 or a special meeting in lieu
thereof. Each of G. David Forney, Jr., John K. Kerr, Mark G.
McGrath, and Michael A. Tzannes continued to serve as a director following
the Annual Meeting.
|
The votes
cast to elect the Class III directors were:
Name
|
For
|
Abstain
|
Adrian
F. Kruse
|
15,382,310
|
701,935
|
Edmund
C. Reiter
|
15,403,008
|
681,237
|
28
ITEM
6:
Exhibits
(a) Exhibits
Exhibit
31.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
Exhibit
31.2
|
Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002.
|
Exhibit
32.1
|
Certification
of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
____________________
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to
be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly
authorized.
AWARE,
INC.
|
||
Date: July 25,
2008
|
By:
|
/s/
Michael A.
Tzannes
|
Michael
A. Tzannes, Chief Executive Officer
|
||
Date: July 25,
2008
|
By:
|
/s/ Richard P.
Moberg
|
Richard
P. Moberg, Chief Financial
Officer
(Principal Financial and
Accounting
Officer)
|
29