AXON ENTERPRISE, INC. - Annual Report: 2010 (Form 10-K)
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
(Mark One)
þ | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010
or
o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period
from
to
Commission File Number: 001-16391
TASER International, Inc.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
86-0741227 (I.R.S. Employer Identification Number) |
|
17800 N. 85th St. Scottsdale, AZ (Address of principal executive offices) |
85255 (Zip Code) |
(480) 991-0797
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class | Name of each exchange on which registered | |
Common Stock, $0.00001 par value per share |
The Nasdaq Global Select 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 o No þ
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 o No þ
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 þ No o
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 o No o
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 registrants knowledge, in
definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K
or any amendment to this Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.:
Large accelerated filer o | Accelerated filer þ | Non-accelerated filer o (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | Smaller Reporting Company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the issuer, based on the
last sales price of the issuers common stock on June 30, 2010, which was the last business day of
the registrants most recently completed second fiscal quarter, as reported by NASDAQ, was
$235,977,195.
The number of shares of the registrants common stock outstanding as of March 10, 2011, was
62,625,936.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Parts of registrants definitive proxy statement to be prepared and filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission not later than 120 days after December 31, 2010 are incorporated by reference
into Part III of this Form 10-K.
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
Year Ended December 31, 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
Year Ended December 31, 2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page | ||||||||
4 | ||||||||
14 | ||||||||
21 | ||||||||
21 | ||||||||
21 | ||||||||
21 | ||||||||
21 | ||||||||
23 | ||||||||
24 | ||||||||
34 | ||||||||
36 | ||||||||
63 | ||||||||
63 | ||||||||
65 | ||||||||
65 | ||||||||
65 | ||||||||
65 | ||||||||
65 | ||||||||
65 | ||||||||
65 | ||||||||
67 | ||||||||
Exhibit 21.1 | ||||||||
Exhibit 23.1 | ||||||||
Exhibit 31.1 | ||||||||
Exhibit 31.2 | ||||||||
Exhibit 32 |
Table of Contents
PART I
The statements contained in this report that are not historical are forward-looking
statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the
Securities Act), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act), including statements regarding our expectations, beliefs, intentions or strategies
regarding the future. We intend that such forward-looking statements be subject to the safe-harbor
provided by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements
relate to, among other things:
| estimates regarding the size of our target markets; |
||
| our ability to further penetrate the law enforcement market; |
||
| growth expectations for existing accounts; |
||
| our intentions and strategies to expand product sales to the international,
Federal, military, corrections, private security and private citizen self-defense
markets; |
||
| fluctuations in gross margins; |
||
| expansion of product capability and the sufficiency of our manufacturing
capacity; |
||
| timing and expectations relating to new product and service introductions; |
||
| product safety; |
||
| our business model and strategy, our perceptions about the opportunity for growth
in the international law enforcement market, the need and willingness of customers
to upgrade and replace existing TASER units, our plans to focus our research and
development efforts in 2011 on the next generation of ECD hardware and refining and
improving our AXON and EVIDENCE.COM products with new and enhanced features; |
||
| the automation of our production process; |
||
| that we will experience an increasing volume of AXON and EVIDENCE.COM trial
programs in 2011; |
||
| that sales to private citizens will be a steady contributor to our business in
2011; |
||
| our plan to continue investment in web activities, public relations and law
enforcement trade shows in 2011; |
||
| the benefit of our customer relationships, installed base of products and medical
and safety testing research we have performed; |
||
| the benefits and value of our EVIDENCE.COM service; |
||
| the sustainability of our cost structure; |
||
| the availability of financing; |
||
| critical accounting estimates; |
||
| the possibility we may engage in currency hedging activities; |
||
| our intention not to pay dividends; |
||
| expectations about future vesting of performance-based stock options and option
exercises; |
||
| our insulation from competition and our competitive advantage; |
||
| the benefits and competitive advantages of our products and services; |
||
| our litigation strategy and the importance of favorable verdicts; |
||
| the outcome of legal proceedings in which we are currently involved; |
||
| our intention to continue to participate in law enforcement trade shows; |
||
| our strategy to grow our international presence; |
||
| that we have readily available alternative materials and components suppliers; |
||
| the sufficiency and availability of our liquid assets and capital resources; |
||
| our plans to invest in data centers and upgrades to our technology and network
infrastructure to support our EVIDENCE.COM service; |
||
| our intentions about future development efforts and activities, including our
intentions to invest in research and development; |
||
| trends and expectations relating to certain balance sheet accounts and working
capital items; |
||
| the timing of the resolution of, and trends relating to, unrecognized tax
benefits and liabilities; |
||
| anticipated capital
expenditures; and |
||
| our expectation to
repurchase up to $12.5 million of our outstanding common stock in
2011. |
3
Table of Contents
These statements are qualified by important factors that could cause our actual results to
differ materially from those reflected by the forward-looking statements. Such factors include but
are not limited to those factors detailed in ITEM 1A of this annual report entitled Risk Factors.
The risks included in the foregoing list are not exhaustive. Other sections of this report may
include additional factors that could adversely affect our business and financial performance. New
risk factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for management to predict all such
factors, nor can it assess the impact of all such risk factors or the extent to which any factor,
or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in
any forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking
statements to reflect changed assumptions, the occurrence of unanticipated events or changes to
expectations over time.
We own
the following trademarks: ADVANCED TASER®,
CHECKLOK®,
TASER®,
XREP®,
C2®,
X3®, the
bolt on West Hemisphere logo, the bolt on ball logo, the bolt on circle logo, and the bolt within
circle logo, all registered in the US. All other trademarks and service marks including M18, M26,
X26, X26C, AXON, EVIDENCE.COM, Shockwave, PROTECTOR, and designs belong to TASER International,
Inc., except as expressly indicated as belonging to another.
Item 1. | Business |
Overview
TASER International, Inc.s (the Company or TASER or we or our) core mission is to protect
life, prevent conflict and resolve disputes through technologies that make communities safer. We
are a market leader in the development, manufacture and sale of advanced Electronic Control Devices
(ECDs) designed for use in the law enforcement, military, corrections, private security and
personal defense markets. Since our inception in 1993, we have remained committed to providing
solutions to violent confrontation by developing devices with proprietary technology to
incapacitate dangerous, combative, or high-risk subjects who pose a risk to law enforcement
officers, innocent citizens, or themselves in a manner that is generally recognized as a safer
alternative to other uses of force.
TASER solutions deliver significant results to our customers and to communities in which they
are deployed. With more than 275 independent studies confirming the safety of TASER ECDs relative
to other force options, TASER ECDs have proven a safer alternative to other responses to resistance
in situations of conflict. Further, most reporting agencies demonstrate overall decreases in use
of force, and decreases in suspect and officer injuries resulting from conflict. Reducing uses of
force and gaining compliance by use of a TASER ECD has provided significant reductions in workers
compensation expenses and claims for excessive use of force for agencies, cities and taxpayers.
Our mission to protect life also extends to preventing conflict and resolving disputes. We
have learned that bringing a subject into custody is not the end of the challenge for law
enforcement. Often, it is just the beginning since a significant number of incidents that start as
a physical conflict transition into a legal conflict. Whether its prosecuting and convicting the
individual arrested, or responding to excessive use of force allegations, the post-incident legal
process is a considerable part of the challenge law enforcement faces on a continual basis and can
often take years and millions of litigation dollars to resolve in the courtroom. To help law
enforcement address this challenge, we have developed a fully integrated hardware and software
solution that provides our law enforcement customers the capabilities to capture, store, manage,
share and analyze video and other digital evidence. Finally, the optimum situation is to have
prevented the conflict from ever escalating. TASER ECDs and AXON on-officer video have a measured
and positive effect on better suspect and officer behavior, as well as achieving compliance without
escalation of force.
Central to our strategy, we conduct research and develop advanced technologies for both the
creation of new, and the enhancement of existing, hardware and software products and services. We
believe that delivering breakthrough innovation and high-value solutions through our various
product platforms is the key to delivering compelling value propositions to meet our customers
needs, and to drive our future growth. We place the highest level of importance on the safety and
appropriate use of our products and have established industry leading training services to provide
our users a comprehensive overview of the legal, policy, medical information and risk mitigation
issues relating to our ECDs and the use of force. Our products are sold through a network of
distribution channels developed for selling and marketing our products and services to law
enforcement agencies, primarily in North America, with continuing focus and effort placed on
expanding these programs in international, military and other markets. In order to facilitate sales
and provide customer service to our European customers, we established TASER International Europe
SE, a wholly owned subsidiary, in 2009.
Our operations are comprised of one segment the sale of advanced ECDs, accessories and
other products and services. Information about sales by geographic region is included in footnote
1(p) of the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form
10-K.
4
Table of Contents
Products
Electronic Control Devices (ECDs)
Our Technology
We make ECDs that use our proprietary Neuro Muscular Incapacitation (NMI) effects for two main
types of market segments: (a) the law enforcement, military, corrections and professional security
markets; and (b) the consumer market. Our products use a replaceable cartridge containing
compressed nitrogen to deploy and propel two small probes that are attached to the ECD by insulated
conductive wires with lengths ranging from 15 to 35 feet. Our ECDs transmit electrical pulses along
the wires and into the body affecting the sensory and motor functions of the peripheral nervous
system. The current can penetrate up to two cumulative inches of clothing, or approximately one
inch per probe. The basic design is to provide time cycles that provide incapacitating effects that
last in cycles of five seconds for our law enforcement, military and corrections products and up to
thirty seconds for our consumer market models. This effect can be extended, if necessary, by the
operator.
Law Enforcement, Military, Corrections and Professional Security Products
For the law enforcement, military, corrections and professional security markets, we
manufacture three hand-held ECD product lines and have also incorporated our technology into
several other product line extensions.
Our most popular product is the TASER® X26 with Shaped Pulse Technology, which we
introduced in 2003. Shaped Pulse Technology is a refined energy pulse that concentrates a small
portion of energy to first penetrate any barriers, while the majority of the energy flows into the
target freely after the barrier has been penetrated. The TASER X26 product line consists of the
TASER X26, various cartridges (described below), a digital power magazine (DPM) the replaceable
battery power supply, data download software and equipment, extended warranties, and a number of
holstering options and accessories. The TASER X26 product line (excluding sales of the consumer
TASER® X26C and individual cartridge sales) accounted for approximately $40.8 million,
$53.4 million and $51.2 million, or 47%, 51% and 55% of our net sales, for the years ended December
31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
In the third quarter of 2009, we introduced the TASER® X3, which we believe
represents a significant advancement in capabilities and features over our existing devices. The X3
is a revolutionary new multi-shot ECD that can engage three separate targets, display Warning Arcs
while loaded, deliver a calibrated NMI pulse that results in improved safety characteristics and
enhanced dataport logs known as the Trilogy Logs that include Event, Pulse, and Engineering
Logs. While the TASER X3 offers enhanced firepower over existing ECDs, it also represents a
significant leap in sensor and computation power making it the most intelligent hand-held force
option ever developed. The TASER X3 product line (excluding individual cartridge sales) accounted
for approximately $2.3 million and $0.5 million, or approximately 3% and less than 1%, of our net
sales, for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Our third law enforcement product line is the ADVANCED TASER® M26, which we
originally launched in November 1999 and was the first TASER ECD featuring the NMI capability. The
ADVANCED TASER M26 product line consists of the ADVANCED TASER M26, various cartridges (described
below), rechargeable batteries, a battery charging system, data download software and equipment,
extended warranties, and a number of holstering options and accessories. We will discontinue the
sale of this product in North America beginning in 2011; however, it will continue to be available
and will be supported for emerging international markets who wish to introduce our technology with
a lower cost option. The ADVANCED TASER M26 product line (excluding individual cartridge sales)
accounted for approximately $2.2 million, $3.3 million and $2.5 million, or approximately 3%, of
our net sales, for the years ended December 31, 2010 2009 and 2008, respectively
ECD Product Line Extensions
Over the past several years, we have developed more innovative methods to deploy our
proprietary NMI technology, increasing the capabilities of our systems and extending the range at
which they can be deployed. This resulted in two new products which were introduced to the market
in 2009.
The TASER eXtended Range Electronic Projectile (XREP) is a self-contained, wireless
(non-tethered) ECD that deploys from a 12-gauge pump-action shotgun. It delivers a similar NMI
bio-effect as our X26 handheld ECD, but can be delivered to a maximum effective range of 100 feet
(30.48 meters). The battery supply is fully integrated into the chassis and provides the power to
the XREP round. While the XREP can be fired from a pump-action shotgun, we also partnered with
Mossberg to develop the TASER® X12 Less-Lethal Shotgun (LLS). The X12 is a
Mossberg® 500 12-gauge shotgun modified for improved functioning with the XREP. It is
a fully integrated less-lethal platform. The TASER X12 includes Radial Key ammunition technology,
which is a proprietary, patent-pending technology designed to prevent the TASER X12 from deploying
lethal 12-gauge rounds, eliminating the possibility of an end user loading lethal ammunition during
high-stress situations.
5
Table of Contents
The
TASER®
Shockwave security system is the first generation of
TASER®
Remote Area Denial
(TRAD)
technology allowing for both increased safety and stand-off
capability during hostile situations through the use of our NMI technology. It is a manually
activated TASER security system that simultaneously fires six TASER cartridges to saturate a
20-degree arc with 25-foot TASER cartridges. The Shockwave is designed as a fully modular system,
allowing the end user complete flexibility to deploy as needed to achieve the desired objective.
Multiple TASER Shockwave units can be stacked together either horizontally in order to extend area
coverage, or vertically to allow multiple salvo engagements; or vertically to maximize either area
coverage or cartridge pattern density. These features provide the capability to project area denial
from a secure location. The system minimizes risk as the system can be activated with the push of a
button on a control box at a safe stand-off distance of up to 100 meters. The TASER Shockwave unit
deploys its cartridges up to 25-feet to instantaneously incapacitate multiple personnel within the
field of deployment coverage.
Consumer Products
For the personal defense market our primary consumer product is the TASER® C2 ECD,
which we introduced in 2007. This device is a compact system that provides the same proven NMI
effectiveness as our market leading TASER X26 but in a less intimidating, more compact form factor
and at a price point more attractive to private citizens. Our sale and marketing of the TASER C2
promotes responsible ownership and aims to prevent misuse by keeping the device inactive until the
owner has successfully completed identification verification.
We
also manufacture the TASER®
X26C, ADVANCED
TASER® M18 and ADVANCED
TASER® M18L devices for use by consumers. The X26C was developed in conjunction with
the law enforcement TASER X26 version; however, its effect lasts longer allowing the owner more
time to escape danger. The ADVANCED TASER M18 and ADVANCED TASER M18L are designed after the law
enforcement ADVANCED TASER M26 version; however, the electrical pulse rate is lower. The ADVANCED
TASER M18 and ADVANCED TASER M18L are identical except that the ADVANCED TASER M18L has an
integrated laser-aiming device. These three product lines consist of the units themselves,
cartridges, batteries and digital power magazines, and a number of holstering options and
accessories.
Our total consumer products accounted for approximately $4.8 million,
$5.9 million and $7.6 million, or 6%, 6% and 8% of our net sales, for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
Cartridges and Other Accessories
We manufacture multiple cartridge types: a 15 cartridge, a 21 cartridge, a 25 XP cartridge,
a 35 cartridge, a 21 training cartridge, a 15 cartridge for the C2, and in 2009, we introduced
the new range of Smart Cartridges for use with the X3. The 15 cartridge is capable of firing a
distance of 15 feet and is sold primarily to the law enforcement market for training and the
consumer market for use in the ADVANCED TASER M18, ADVANCED TASER M18L, and TASER X26C devices. The
C2 15 cartridge is designed specifically for use in the TASER C2. The 21, 25 XP, 35, and 21
training cartridges are sold only to the law enforcement, military, and corrections markets. The
25 XP cartridge is different from the 21 cartridge in that it has a longer range and its probes
are longer and heavier, which allows it to penetrate a thicker clothing barrier. The training
cartridge contains non-conductive wiring, which allows law enforcement, military, and corrections
trainers to use the cartridge during training role-playing scenarios. The Smart Cartridges
designed for the X3 come in a more compact profile to accommodate the 3-in-1 multi-shot capability
of the X3, with ranges of 15, 25 and 35. The Smart Cartridge communicates with the fire control
system within the X3, indicating the type of cartridge loaded in each bay and its deployment
status. The new static resistant propulsion system allows the X3 to display NMI arcs without firing
the cartridge which also reduces the risk of accidental static discharge misfires.
All of our cartridges, with the exception of the training cartridge, contain numerous colored,
confetti-like tags bearing the cartridges serial number. These tags, referred to as Anti-Felon
Identification tags, or AFIDs, are scattered when one of our cartridges is deployed. We require
sellers of our products to participate in the AFID program by registering buyers of our cartridges.
In many cases, we can use AFIDs to identify the registered owner of cartridges deployed.
Individual cartridge sales accounted for approximately $22.0 million, $27.9 million and $20.5
million, or approximately 25%, 27% and 22%of our net sales, for the years ended December 31, 2010,
2009 and 2008, respectively.
In 2009, we introduced the TASER® Controlled Digital Power Magazine (CDPM), a new
accessory for the TASER X26 ECD. The CDPM has the same functionality as a regular DPM; however, the
CDPM features a disabling safety key and wrist strap lanyard designed to secure the device to the
officer. If a prisoner or suspect attempts to take the TASER X26 device away, the lanyard pulls the
safety key connection away from the unit. If the key is separated for more than two seconds, the
system instantly deactivates the TASER X26 and requires a password to reactivate it.
6
Table of Contents
In 2006, we launched an accessory to the X26 called the TASER® Cam recorder. The
TASER Cam is a video recording device that captures both video and audio of potential and actual
TASER use incidents. The device can capture video and audio before, during and after a TASER
deployment, which provides law enforcement with a greater level of accountability to support their
use of TASER devices against a resistant subject. The TASER Cam is capable of recording in zero
light conditions through the use of an infrared illuminator. A non-audio version of the device is
also available for agencies operating in states where legislation prohibits the use of audio
recordings.
In 2004, we introduced the X-Rail mount as an accessory designed to attach an X26 ECD to a
Picatinny rail (MIL-STD-1913 rail) providing law enforcement and military the ability to combine
TASER technology with their firearms giving the user lethal and non-lethal options on the same
weapon.
AXON and EVIDENCE.COM
In 2008 and 2009, we devoted significant resources to the design and development of our new
end-to-end on-officer video and digital evidence management solution TASER AXON tactical
computer and EVIDENCE.COM.
The AXON tactical computer (ATC) combines advanced audio-video record/capture capabilities
worn by first responders. An audio-video earpiece, imager, speaker and microphone integrates into
the communications loop between existing radios and the communications headset, recording video of
critical incidents from the visual perspective of the officer. AXON significantly improves officer
efficiency by reducing report documentation workload while increasing accuracy and accountability.
EVIDENCE.COM is a virtual evidence management system and warehouse, offering digital evidence
management, sharing, analysis and storage in a highly secure, easily accessible environment. From
EVIDENCE.COM, both agencies and legal professionals may quickly and securely access key evidence
data without the difficult and sometimes-impossible inventory searches common to existing evidence
management and storage methods. They can also view uploaded TASER X3 ECD trilogy logs including
firing, pulse and engineering data.
We launched initial field trials of the AXON and EVIDENCE.COM in the fourth quarter of 2009,
and completed a number of trials in 2010 which resulted in several agency deployments. We
anticipate an increasing volume of similar trial programs in 2011 and believe these trial programs
are the best way for our customers to see the powerful capabilities, benefits and strong return on
investment of the value proposition of this technology for themselves.
Product Warranties
We offer a one year limited warranty on all of the TASER X3, TASER X26 and ADVANCED TASER
devices. After the warranty expires, if the device fails to operate properly for any reason, we
will replace the TASER X3 and X26 at a discounted price depending on when the product was placed in
service. These fees are intended to cover the handling and repair costs and include a profit. We
believe this policy is attractive to our law enforcement, military, and corrections agency
customers. In particular, it avoids disputes regarding the source or cause of any defect. Extended
warranties, which provide additional coverage beyond the limited warranty, ranging from one to four
years, are also offered at specified fees.
We offer a 90-day limited warranty on the TASER C2 and the X26C devices. Our TASER C2 and the
X26C are designed to disable an attacker for up to 30 seconds. We encourage private citizens to
leave the units and flee after firing them. As a result, we also provide free replacement units to
private citizens who follow this suggested procedure. To qualify for the replacement unit, users
must file a police report that describes the incident and confirms the use of the TASER C2 or the
X26C.
The AXON ATC comes with a one year standard warranty, while the head cam, communications hub
and cabling are warranted for 90 days. The TASER Cam is warranted for one year.
Markets
Law Enforcement and Corrections
Federal, state and local law enforcement agencies in the United States and throughout the
world currently represent the primary target market for our TASER ECDs. In the law enforcement
market, more than 16,000 law enforcement agencies in more than 40 countries have made initial
purchases of our TASER brand devices for testing or deployment.
7
Table of Contents
We continue to deploy resources for educating correctional facility personnel as well as
parole and probation field officers in the benefits of using TASER brand products. We have
developed training programs and command staff demonstrations specific to the corrections market and
we attended several corrections tradeshows and conferences to expand our reach into the market. Our
TASER devices are deployed in county correctional facilities such as those operated by the Los
Angeles Custody Division and the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office (AZ). State correctional agencies
deploying TASER devices include Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Kentucky, Louisiana, Montana, Nevada,
North Dakota, Oregon, Tennessee, Utah, Washington, and Wisconsin.
Military Forces, both United States and Foreign Allies
TASER devices continued to be deployed in support of key strategic military operations in
locations around the world. We continued our focus initiative on supporting our military customers.
The former head of the Military Joint Non Lethal Weapons Directorate is our Vice President of
Government and Military Programs, and we meet quarterly with our Senior Executive Advisory Group
(SEAG) comprised of a team of professionals with extensive military, homeland defense and law
enforcement experience with the purpose of advising on business models in support of military
users. The business group (Federal Programs) has concentrated on supporting military and other
federal use of our existing products as well as developing new technology through contracted
support. In 2008, we entered into a science and technology contract with the Joint Non-Lethal
Weapons Directorate (JNLWD) of the U.S Department of Defense to develop a 40mm projectile,
compatible with already fielded weapons, which allows for extension and improvement of the our
existing eXtended Range Electronic Projectile (XREP) technology. The development contract comprised
three phases, each of which were successfully completed between 2008 and 2010.
Private Security
We still continue to pursue opportunities for sales of TASER devices in private security
markets; however, we have made limited sales to date. Private security officers represent a broad
range of individuals, including contract security patrol, healthcare, gaming, retail security
employees and many others. Similar to our other emerging markets, we have developed training
programs and demonstrations specific to the industry by meeting with several large corporate and
private patrol security companies to discover their unique needs. We also attended several private
security tradeshows, conferences and industry association meetings to generate a presence in this
market space.
Private Citizen / Personal Protection
In July 2007, we introduced the TASER C2 personal protection device, specifically designed for
the private citizen market. This consumer product combined with other consumer offerings,
contributed approximately 5%, 6% and 8% of our total net sales in 2010, 2009 and 2008,
respectively. While it has been a challenge generating product traction in a difficult economic
climate for consumers, we believe private citizen sales will continue to be a steady contributor to
our business in 2011 as a result of various distribution relationships and marketing strategies we
have put in place to continue to promote awareness of the TASER C2 in the consumer market.
Sales and Marketing
Law enforcement, federal / military, corrections and security agencies represent our primary
target markets. In each of these markets, the decision to purchase TASER ECDs is normally made by a
group of people, including the agency head; the agencys training staff, and agency weapons
experts. Depending on the size and cost of the device deployment and local procurement rules and
customs, the decision may involve political decision-makers such as city council members or the
federal government. The decision-making process can take as little as a few weeks or as long as
several years. Although we have focused on three primary markets, we have been able to expand our
customer base to thousands of end users within these markets. We currently sell our products to
more than 16,000 law enforcement agencies.
8
Table of Contents
Since the introduction of the ADVANCED TASER M26 in 1999, we have used multiple types of media
to communicate the benefits of acquiring and deploying our products. These campaigns have included
the development of personalized CD/DVD packages geared toward law enforcement leaders in the
community, web and print advertisements in law enforcement publications, and the use of more than
2,600 training classes conducted around the world, and more recently in the case of the TASER X3 an
integrated online media launch including a dedicated website. We also target key regional and
national law enforcement trade shows where we can demonstrate the TASER devices to leading
departments. In 2010, we attended and exhibited at 75 regional, national and international law
enforcement trade shows. We also held our annual TASER Conference as part of our certified master
instructor school, the continued focus of which was to train the officers in the use of all of the
latest ECDs and other new products.
We plan to continue investment in web activities (search, advertising and social media),
public relations and law enforcement trade shows and conferences in 2011, as it provides us the
ability to market our products to our target audience. We believe these types of activities
accelerate penetration of our TASER product lines in each market, which should lead to increased
visibility in both the private security and private citizen markets and reinforce the value of
non-lethal devices for self-defense.
United States Distribution
With the exception of several accounts to which we sell directly, the vast majority of our law
enforcement agency sales in the United States are made through our network of law enforcement
distributors. In addition, we have one military and federal government contracting distributor.
These distributors were selected based upon their reputation within their respective industries,
their contacts, and their distribution network. Our regional managers work closely with the
distributors in their territory to inform and educate the law enforcement communities. We continue
to monitor our law enforcement distributors closely to help ensure that our service standards are
achieved. We also reserve the right to take any large agency order directly to secure the agencys
account balance with us.
Sales in the private citizen market are primarily made through our commercial distributors and
our web site, iTASER.com. We have also established relationships selling to sporting goods retail
chains. We have implemented a variety of marketing initiatives to support sales of the TASER C2
personal protection device, with a focus on web, public relations and consumer trade shows. We
hired a professional digital media marketing firm and a separate public relations company to assist
us in media and press events, and editorial placements along with attending numerous tradeshows
specifically to target the consumer market. We continue to sell all other TASER citizen devices and
products through web sales and our established commercial distributors.
International Distribution
We market and distribute our products to foreign markets through a network of distributors.
For geographical and cultural reasons, our distributors usually have a territory defined by their
countrys borders. These distributors market both our law enforcement, military, and corrections
products, and our consumer products where allowed by law.
Our distributors work with local law enforcement, military, and corrections agencies in the
same manner as our domestic market distributors. For example, they perform demonstrations, attend
industry tradeshows, maintain country specific web sites, engage in print advertising, and arrange
training classes.
Training Programs
Most law enforcement, military, security and corrections agencies will not purchase new
weapons until a training program is in place to instruct and certify personnel in their proper use.
We offer a 20 hour class that certifies law enforcement, military, corrections and security agency
trainers as instructors in the use of TASER ECDs. We have partnered with the Northeast Wisconsin
Technical College (NWTC) to provide an online learning opportunity for new and re-certifying TASER
instructors. As of December 31, 2010, over 46,200 law enforcement officers around the world have
been trained and certified as instructors in the proper use of TASER brand devices. This includes
approximately 41,400 officers in the United States and 4,800 in other countries.
9
Table of Contents
Currently, 1,979 of our certified instructors have undergone further training and became
certified as master instructors. 1,421 were certified in the US and 558 were international. We
authorize these individuals to train and certify other law enforcement, military, corrections and
professional security agency trainers as TASER instructors, not just end users within their own
organization. The Master Instructors are independent professional trainers, serve as local area
TASER experts, and assist in conducting TASER demonstrations at other police departments within
their regions. In addition, 207 of our certified instructors have completed the same training and
were certified as Advanced Instructors. Advanced Instructors are authorized to certify others
within their own agency as TASER instructors. From 2001 2008, TASER has held one Master
Instructor School per year. Due to increased demand, in 2009 we started scheduling two Master
Instructor Schools each year in the US, one in the East and one in the West to accommodate customer
requests. The fee for attending the Master Instructor School is $695. Military personnel are
trained by our Chief Instructor. Approximately 170 of our Master Instructors have agreed to conduct
TASER device training classes on a regular basis. We provide logistical support for the training
classes. We charge a fee of $350 for each training attendee who is being certified for the first
time and $175 for recertification. We pay Master Instructors a per-session training fee for each
session they conduct. We conducted 450 training courses in 2010 and as of December 31, 2010, we
have conducted a cumulative 2,611 training courses during which we have trained more than 46,200
individuals as instructors for TASER ECDs.
In 2005, we started a TASER Technician course to train agencies on proper care and
preventative maintenance of TASER devices. We charge a fee of $275 to each attendee. In 2010, we
hosted 29 Technician courses, including 26 in the United States and 3 internationally; 337 students
attended the Technician course in the United States and 36 attended in other countries. As of
December 31, 2010, approximately 2,300 people have been trained and certified as TASER Technicians
in 131 courses.
In 2008, we started offering a TASER Evidence Collection and Analysis (ECA) course to teach
investigators how to collect and analyze TASER ECD related evidence at a crime scene. In 2010 we
conducted 25 such ECA courses in the United States and trained 226 people, and one course
internationally for 10 people. As of December 31, 2010, we have conducted 41 ECA courses and
trained 352 people. The fee for the ECA course is $150 per student.
We have also designed a training course for private citizen customers. Customers who purchase
an X26C device receive a certificate good for a one hour, one-on-one training session with an X26C
certified instructor. We have 836 instructors certified to give the X26C training. In the first
quarter of 2011 we will launch a new online training course for consumer instructors. This course
focuses on non-law enforcement private self-defense training schools that have expressed a desire
to include TASER consumer products in their courses. The course fee will be $99.
In December 2010 we launched an online TASER ECD End User course through NWTC. The fee is $30
per student.
In order to coordinate the growing demands of our training programs, we created a Training
Advisory Board. This board annually reviews the qualifications of the master instructors, and
provides retraining or certification as required. In addition, the Training Advisory Board oversees
the trainers and curriculum to ensure that new information is properly communicated and
implemented. The Training Advisory Board also gives input into new product development. We also
created the position of Senior Master Instructor. Twenty four experienced Master Instructors have
been promoted to this position based on their exemplary performance as Master Instructors. Their
primary duties are to perform quality control checks on Master Instructors during an instructor
course and to help instruct at the Master Instructor School. Additionally, we employ one staff
Instructor who is a full-time employee responsible for coordinating course delivery and
development. We also employ a Director of Training Operations who oversees the day to day operation
of the department, coordinates major training events, assists with course development and delivery,
and supervises the clerical staff.
Manufacturing
We perform light manufacturing and final assembly operations at our headquarters in
Scottsdale, Arizona and own substantially all of the equipment required to develop, prototype,
manufacture and assemble our finished products. This includes critical injection molds, schematics,
test equipment and prototypes utilized by our supply chain for the production of required raw
materials and sub-assemblies. We have implemented lean/six sigma methodologies to optimize all
direct and indirect resources within the organization which has helped to boost capacity for
existing products, as well as provide the flexibility to accommodate production of new TASER
product introductions. We are currently operating a single production shift; however, other
capacity options, including the use of multiple shifts, will be considered should we experience
higher demand resulting from large orders of legacy or new product releases. We continue to
maintain our ISO 9001 certification.
Our XREP product is considered a firearm due to the propellant used to launch it from a
firearm. We have a Class 7 Federal Firearms license to manufacture, store and sell XREP and related
products. We lease facilities from a local third party who specializes in defense products and
provides facilities, ensuring compliance to required firearm and dangerous good standards.
10
Table of Contents
We continuously seek opportunities to invest in automated equipment for the continuous
improvement of product quality and reduction of manufacturing costs. As a result, we have
implemented a number of equipment initiatives including the purchase and integration of robotic
equipment, computerized laboratory and medical testing equipment, machining and tooling equipment,
as well as sophisticated modeling equipment for our Research and Development Department. In the
fourth quarter of 2009, we completed an ambitious undertaking with the final installation of our
highly automated cartridge assembly line which, in 2010, has improved both our production capacity
and yields, while significantly improving efficiency over what was previously a very
labor-intensive manufacturing process.
Supply chain management has and will continue to be a focus for us. We presently purchase
completed Printed Circuit Board Assemblies (PCBAs) and components primarily from suppliers located
in the United States, along with selective strategic relationships internationally. Although we
currently obtain plastic components from an outside supplier base, we own all the designs and
tooling. We believe there are readily available qualified alternative suppliers in most cases who
can consistently meet our needs for these components. We continue to develop and implement policies
to mitigate supply chain risk and ensure continuity of supply, while maintaining efficiencies at
all levels within the organization.
Competition
Law Enforcement, Corrections and Private Security Markets
The primary competitive factors in the law enforcement and corrections market include a
weapons accuracy, effectiveness, safety, cost and ease of use. Stinger Systems, introduced an
electronic device in 2007 to compete with the TASER X26; however, they had limited success before
going out of business in 2010. Stinger Systems subsequently sold its assets to Karbon Arms. We are
not aware of any significant sales to date. We were granted summary judgment in a patent
infringement claim against Stinger Systems in 2010 and an injunction
was issued against Stinger Systems in August 2010. We believe that our strong relationship with customers, our
large installed base of products, and the significant amount of medical and safety testing already
performed on our products will provide us with a strong competitive advantage over our competition.
We also believe the ADVANCED TASER, TASER X26 and TASER X3 devices compete indirectly with a
variety of non-lethal alternatives. These alternatives include, but are not limited to, pepper
spray and impact weapons sold by companies such as Defense Technology, and PepperBall Technologies,
Inc. We believe our TASER brand devices advanced technology, versatility, effectiveness, built-in
accountability systems, and low injury rate enable it to compete effectively against these
less-lethal alternatives.
Military Market
In the military markets, both in the United States and abroad, a wide variety of weapon
systems are utilized to accomplish the mission at hand. Conducted energy devices have gained
increased acceptance as a result of the policing role of military personnel in the conflicts in
both Iraq and Afghanistan. There has also been an increased awareness of the use of non-lethal
weapons to preserve human intelligence. TASER ECDs give our armed forces one means to capture or
immobilize targets without using lethal force. We are the only supplier providing ECDs to these
military agencies. There is indirect competition from pepper spray and impact weapons sold by
companies such as Defense Technology and PepperBall Technologies, Inc.
Private Citizen Market
Electronic control devices have gained limited acceptance in the private citizen market. These
devices compete with other less lethal weapons such as batons, clubs, and chemical sprays as well
as lethal force options. The primary competitive factors in the private citizen market include a
weapons cost, effectiveness, safety and ease of use. We believe the widespread adoption of our
TASER devices by prominent law enforcement agencies will help us to further penetrate the private
citizen market.
Video Evidence Market
As we move into the video evidence capture and storage market segment, we are directly
competing in a highly fragmented and competitive market against companies with an established
presence such as the in-car video market. We believe our AXON product, which places the camera
directly on-officer, overcomes some of the inherent limitations that an in-car system brings. When
combined with our EVIDENCE.COM service to store, manage and analyze video events, we believe our
end-to-end solution is a compelling value proposition for law enforcement agencies to evaluate.
11
Table of Contents
Regulation
United States Regulation
The TASER X26, TASER X3, ADVANCED TASER, TASER C2, SHOCKWAVE and AIR TASER 34000 devices, as
well as the cartridges used by these devices, are subject to regulations; however, none are
considered to be a firearm by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. The
TASER XREP, however, does use a propellant system which falls under the definition of a firearm
and is, therefore, subject to Federal firearms-related regulations specifically applying to the
sale and distribution of these devices within the United States. In the 1980s many states adopted
regulations restricting the sale and use of stun guns, inexpensive hand-held shock devices and
electronic weapons. We believe existing stun gun laws and regulations also apply to our devices.
In 2009, New Jerseys Attorney General approved a supplemental use of force policy which
allows law enforcement officers in New Jersey to use electronic stun devices in limited
circumstances involving emotionally disturbed individuals. This policy also limits the number of
patrol officers per agency who carry electronic control devices. Prior to 2009, New Jersey was the
only state to prohibit the use of ECDs and stun devices by law enforcement. In 2002 through 2004,
we worked with several law enforcement agencies, government agencies and distributors to overturn
prior legislation preventing the sale of TASER devices to law enforcement agencies in certain
regions of the U.S. These combined efforts were successful in changing the legislation in the
states of Hawaii, Massachusetts and Michigan.
In many cases, the law enforcement and corrections market is subject to different regulations
than the private citizen market. Where different regulations exist, we assume the regulations
affecting the private citizen market also apply to the private security markets except as the
applicable regulations otherwise specifically provide.
As of December 31, 2010, state and local codes prohibit the possession of stun guns, including
TASER ECDs by the general public in Hawaii, Wisconsin, Michigan, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, New
York, New Jersey and the District of Columbia as well as a number of counties, cities and towns.
We are also subject to environmental laws and regulations, including restrictions on the
presence of certain substances in electronic products. Reference is made to Section 1A, Risk
Factors under the heading Environmental laws and regulations subject us to a number of risks and
could result in significant liabilities and costs.
Our EVIDENCE.COM SaaS online offering is subject to government regulation of the internet in many areas,
including telecommunications, data protection, user privacy and online content.
United States Export Regulation
Our ECDs are considered a crime control product by the U.S. Government. Accordingly, the
export of our devices is regulated under export administration regulations. As a result, we must
obtain export licenses from the Department of Commerce for all shipments to foreign countries other
than Canada. Most of our requests for export licenses have been granted, and the need to obtain
these licenses has not caused a material delay in our shipments. The need to obtain licenses,
however, has limited or impeded our ability to ship to certain foreign markets. Export regulations
also prohibit the further shipment of our products from foreign markets in which we hold a valid
export license to foreign markets in which we do not hold an export license for our products.
In addition, in 2000, the Department of Commerce adopted regulations restricting the export of
technology used in our devices. These regulations apply to both the technology incorporated in our
device systems and in the processes used to produce them. The technology export regulations do not
apply to production that takes place within the United States, but is applicable to all
sub-assemblies and controlled items manufactured outside the United States.
Foreign Regulation
Foreign regulations, which may affect our devices, are numerous and often unclear. We prefer
to work with a distributor who is familiar with the applicable import regulations in each of our
foreign markets. Experience with foreign distributors in the past indicates that restrictions may
prohibit certain sales of our products in a number of countries. The vast majority of countries
permit TASER devices to be sold and used by law enforcement. We rely on our distributors to inform
us of those countries where the TASER device is prohibited or restricted.
12
Table of Contents
Intellectual Property
We protect our intellectual property with U.S. and foreign patents and trademarks. Our patents
and pending patent applications relate to technology used by us in connection with our products. We
also rely on international treaties, organizations and foreign laws to protect our intellectual
property. As of December 31, 2010, we hold 47 United States patents and 55 foreign patents and also
have numerous patents and trademarks pending. Our patents expire at varying dates ranging between
2014 and 2029. The earliest expiring US patent covers an aiming system having two angled laser
light sources, one for the top dart and one for the lower dart. This technology is used in the X3
ECD. We continuously assess whether and where to seek formal protection for particular innovations
and technologies based on such factors as the commercial significance of our operations and our
competitors operations in particular countries and regions; our strategic technology or product
directions in different countries; and the degree to which intellectual property laws exist and are
meaningfully enforced in different jurisdictions.
Confidentiality agreements are used with employees, consultants and key suppliers to help
ensure the confidentiality of our trade secrets.
TASER has the exclusive rights to many internet domain names primarily including TASER.com
and EVIDENCE.COM.
Research and Development
Our research and development initiatives are conducted in two separate categories. The first
is internally funded research and development, and the second is research externally funded by
customers having requirements for specific capabilities. Both categories focus on next generation
technology, yet are differentiated by the anticipated breadth of the market opportunity, the time
to project completion and accounting treatment. Internally funded research has been primarily
focused on improvements to existing TASER products, or the development of new applications for
TASER technology that we believe generally will have broad market appeal. Externally funded work
focuses on specific packaging or delivery requirements of existing TASER technology that is of high
value to particular customers but may not be viable product solutions to other customers. These
projects generally represent product developments which are long-term in nature and require
external resources, development using outside companies or expert consulting.
Research and development initiatives include bio-medical research and electrical, mechanical
and software engineering. We expect that future development projects will focus on extending the
range, improving the functionality and developing new delivery options for our ECD products. In
addition, during 2009 and 2010 we devoted significant resources to the development of AXON and
EVIDENCE.COM and have established a dedicated software development team in Carpenteria, CA to plan,
develop, test and support the operation of our Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) product.
Our investment in internally funded research and development totaled approximately $11.4
million, $20.0 million and $12.9 million in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Our investment in
research and development staff and equipment continues to represent a significant increase from
previous years and reflects our commitment to maintaining and extending our current technology. Our
return on that investment is intended to be realized over the long term, although new systems and
technologies often have a more immediate impact on our business.
Employees
As of December 31, 2010, we had 320 full-time employees and 45 temporary employees. The
breakdown of our full-time employees by department is as follows: 129 direct manufacturing
employees and 191 administrative and manufacturing support employees. Of the 191 administrative and
manufacturing support employees, 51 were involved in sales, marketing, communications and training;
62 were employed in research, development, TASER Virtual Systems and engineering; 28 were employed
in administrative functions inclusive of executive management, legal, finance and accounting; 8
were employed in information systems technologies; 11 were employed in quality control and 31 were
employed in manufacturing support functions. Our employees are not covered by any collective
bargaining agreement, and we have never experienced a work stoppage. We believe that our relations
with our employees are good.
Available Information
We were incorporated in Arizona in September 1993 as an ICER Corporation. We changed our name
to AIR TASER, Inc. in December 1993 and to TASER International, Incorporated in April 1998. In
January 2001, we reincorporated in Delaware as TASER International, Inc. Our website is located at
www.TASER.com. Our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on
Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 are available on our website as soon as reasonably practicable
after we electronically file such material with, or furnish such material to, the SEC. Other
information that is not part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K can be accessed through our website
at www.TASER.com.
13
Table of Contents
Item 1A. | Risk Factors |
Because of the following factors, as well as other variables affecting our operating results,
our past financial performance may not be a reliable indicator of our future performance and
historical trends should not be used to anticipate our results or trends in future periods.
We are materially dependent on acceptance of our products by the law enforcement, both domestic and
international, and federal markets. If law enforcement agencies do not continue to purchase our
products, our revenues will be adversely affected.
A substantial number of law enforcement and corrections agencies may not purchase our
electronic control devices. Law enforcement and corrections agencies may be influenced by claims or
perceptions that ECDs such as our products are unsafe or may be used in an abusive manner. In
addition, earlier generation conducted energy devices may have been perceived as ineffective. Sales
of our products to these agencies may also be delayed or limited by these claims or perceptions.
Most
of our end-user customers are subject to budgetary and political
constraints, particularly in the currently challenging economic
environment, that may delay or
prevent sales.
Most of our end-user customers are government agencies. These agencies often do not set their
own budgets and therefore, have limited control over the amount of money they can spend. In
addition, these agencies experience political pressure that may dictate the manner in which they
spend money. As a result, even if an agency wants to acquire our products, it may be unable to
purchase them due to budgetary or political constraints. Currently, many governmental agencies are
continuing to experience severe budgetary constraints. There can be no assurance that the economic
and budgeting issues will not worsen and adversely impact sales of our products. Some government
agency orders may also be canceled or substantially delayed due to budgetary, political or other
scheduling delays which frequently occur in connection with the acquisition of products by such
agencies and such cancellations may accelerate or be more severe than we have experienced
historically as a result of the current economic environment.
We may face personal injury, wrongful death and other liability claims that harm our reputation and
adversely affect our sales and financial condition.
Our products are often used in aggressive confrontations that may result in serious, permanent
bodily injury or death to those involved. Our products may be associated with these injuries. A
person injured in a confrontation or otherwise in connection with the use of our products may bring
legal action against us to recover damages on the basis of theories including personal injury,
wrongful death, negligent design, defective product or inadequate warning. We are currently subject
to a number of such lawsuits. We may also be subject to lawsuits involving allegations of misuse of
our products. If successful, personal injury, misuse and other claims could have a material adverse
effect on our operating results and financial condition and could result in negative publicity
about our products. Although we carry product liability insurance, we do incur significant legal
expenses within our self-insured retention in defending these lawsuits and significant litigation
could also result in a diversion of managements attention and resources, negative publicity and a
potential award of monetary damages in excess of our insurance coverage. The outcome of any
litigation is inherently uncertain and there can be no assurance that our existing or any future
litigation will not have a material adverse effect on our revenues, our financial condition or
financial results.
We substantially depend on sales of our TASER X26 ECDs, and if these products do not continue to be
widely accepted, our growth prospects will be diminished.
In the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, we derived our revenues predominantly
from sales of the TASER X26 brand devices and related cartridges, and expect to depend on sales of
these products for the foreseeable future. A decrease in the prices of or demand for these
products, or their failure to achieve broad market acceptance, would significantly harm our growth
prospects, operating results and financial condition.
14
Table of Contents
If we are unable to manage our growth, our prospects may be limited and our future profitability
may be adversely affected.
We intend to expand our product and service lines and our manufacturing capacity as needed to
meet future demand. Any significant expansion may strain our managerial, financial and other
resources. If we are unable to manage our growth, our business, operating results and financial
condition could be adversely affected. We will need to continually improve our operations,
financial and other internal systems to manage our growth effectively, and any failure to do so may
lead to inefficiencies and redundancies, and result in reduced growth prospects and profitability.
To the extent demand for our products increases, our future success will be dependent upon our
ability to ramp manufacturing production capacity which may be accomplished by the implementation
of customized manufacturing automation equipment.
To the extent demand for our products increases significantly in future periods, one of our
key challenges will be to ramp our production capacity to meet sales demand, while maintaining
product quality. Our primary strategies to accomplish this include
introducing additional shifts, increasing the physical size of
our assembly facilities, the hiring of additional production staff, and the implementation of
customized automation equipment. The investments we make in this equipment may not yield the
anticipated labor and material efficiencies. Our inability to meet any future increase in sales
demand or effectively manage our expansion could have a material adverse effect on our revenues,
financial results and financial condition.
Pending litigation may subject us to significant litigation costs, judgments, fines and penalties
in excess of insurance coverage, and divert management attention from our business.
We are involved in numerous litigation matters relating to our products or the use of such
products, litigation against persons who we believe have defamed our products, litigation against
medical examiners who made errors in their autopsy reports, litigation against a competitor and
litigation against former employees. Such matters have resulted and are expected to continue to
result in substantial costs to us and some diversion of our managements attention, which could
adversely affect our business, financial condition or operating results.
Our future success is dependent on our ability to expand sales through distributors and our
inability to recruit new distributors would negatively affect our sales.
Our distribution strategy is to pursue sales through multiple channels with an emphasis on
independent distributors. Our inability to establish relationships with and retain law enforcement
equipment distributors who we believe can successfully sell our products would adversely affect our
sales. In addition, our arrangements with our distributors are generally short-term. If we do not
competitively price our products, meet the requirements of our distributors or end-users, provide
adequate marketing support, or comply with the terms of our distribution arrangements, our
distributors may fail to aggressively market our products or may terminate their relationships with
us. These developments would likely have a material adverse effect on our sales. Our reliance on
the sales of our products by others also makes it more difficult to predict our revenues, cash flow
and operating results.
The success of our EVIDENCE.COM software as a service delivery model is materially dependent on
acceptance of this business model by our law enforcement customers. Delayed or lengthy time to
adoption by law enforcement agencies will negatively impact our sales and profitability.
A substantial number of law enforcement agencies may be slow to adopt our EVIDENCE.COM digital
data evidence management and storage solution, requiring extended periods of trial and evaluation.
The hosted service delivery business model is not presently widely adopted by our law enforcement
customer base. As such the sales cycle has additional complexity with the need to educate our
customers and address issues regarding agency bandwidth requirements, data retention policies, data
security and chain of custody. Delays in successfully securing widespread adoption of EVIDENCE.COM
could adversely affect our revenues, profitability and financial condition.
15
Table of Contents
If we are unable to design, introduce and sell new products or new product features successfully,
our business and financial results could be adversely affected.
Our future success will depend on our ability to develop new products or new product features
that achieve market acceptance in a timely and cost-effective manner. The development of new
products and new product features is complex, time consuming and expensive, and we may experience
delays in completing the development and introduction of new products. We cannot provide any
assurance that products that we may develop in the future will achieve market acceptance. If we
fail to develop new products or new product features on a timely basis that achieve market
acceptance, our business, financial results and competitive position could be adversely affected.
Delays in product development schedules may adversely affect our revenues.
The development of software products such as EVIDENCE.COM is a complex and time-consuming
process. New products and enhancements to existing products can require long development and
testing periods. Our increasing focus on our Software-as-a-Service platform also presents new and
complex development issues. Significant delays in new product or service releases or significant
problems in creating new products or services could adversely affect our revenue.
Acquisitions and joint ventures may have an adverse effect on our business.
We expect to make acquisitions or enter into joint ventures as part of our long-term business
strategy. These transactions involve significant challenges and risks including that the
transaction does not advance our business strategy, that we dont realize a satisfactory return on
our investment, or that we experience difficulty in the integration of new employees, business
systems, and technology, or diversion of managements attention from our other businesses. These
events could harm our operating results or financial condition.
We expend significant resources in anticipation of a sale due to our lengthy sales cycle and may
receive no revenue in return.
Generally, law enforcement and corrections agencies consider a wide range of issues before
committing to purchase our products, including product benefits, training costs, the cost to use
our products in addition to or in place of other non-lethal products, budget constraints and
product reliability, safety and efficacy. The length of our sales cycle may range from a few weeks
to as long as several years. Adverse publicity surrounding our products or the safety of such
products has in the past and could in the future lengthen our sales cycle with customers. In the
past, we believe we have experienced revenue decreases in part as the result of adverse effects on
our customers and potential customers of negative publicity surrounding our products or use of our
products. We may incur substantial selling costs and expend significant effort in connection with
the evaluation of our products by potential customers before they place an order. If these
potential customers do not purchase our products, we will have expended significant resources and
received no revenue in return.
Government regulation of our products may adversely affect sales.
Federal regulation of sales in the United States: With the exceptions of the TASER XREP, our
ECDs are not firearms regulated by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives,
but are consumer products regulated by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission. Although there
are currently no federal laws restricting sales of our core ECD products in the United States,
future federal regulation could adversely affect sales of our products.
Federal regulation of international sales: Our devices are controlled as a crime control
product by the U.S. Department of Commerce, or DOC, for export directly from the United States.
Consequently, we must obtain an export license from the DOC for the export of our devices from the
United States other than to Canada. Our inability to obtain DOC export licenses on a timely basis
for sales of our devices to our international customers could significantly and adversely affect
our international sales.
16
Table of Contents
State and local regulation: Our devices are controlled, restricted or their use prohibited by
a number of state and local governments. Our devices are banned from private citizen sale or use in
seven states: New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Michigan, Wisconsin, Massachusetts and Hawaii.
Some municipalities, including Omaha, Nebraska and Washington, D.C., also prohibit private citizen
use of our products. Other jurisdictions may ban or restrict the sale of our products and our
product sales may be significantly affected by additional state, county and city governmental
regulation.
Foreign regulation: Certain foreign jurisdictions prohibit the sale of ECDs such as our
products, limiting our international sales opportunities.
Environmental laws and regulations subject us to a number of risks and could result in significant
liabilities and costs.
We may be subject to various state, federal and international laws and regulations governing
the environment, including restricting the presence of certain substances in electronic products
and making producers of those products financially responsible for the collection, treatment,
recycling and disposal of those products. Environmental legislation within the European Union (EU)
may increase our cost of doing business internationally and impact our revenues from EU countries
as we comply with and implement these requirements.
The EU has published Directives on the restriction of certain hazardous substances in
electronic and electrical equipment (the RoHS Directive) and on electronic and electrical waste
management (the WEEE Directive). The RoHS Directive restricts the use of a number of substances,
including lead. The WEEE Directive directs members of the European Union to enact laws,
regulations, and administrative provisions to ensure that producers of electric and electronic
equipment are financially responsible for the collection, recycling, treatment and environmentally
responsible disposal of certain products sold into the. In addition, similar environmental
legislation has been or may be enacted in other jurisdictions, including the U.S. (under federal
and state laws) and other countries, the cumulative impact of which could be significant.
We continue to monitor the impact of specific registration and compliance activities required
by the RoHS and WEEE Directives. We endeavor to comply with applicable environmental laws, yet
compliance with such laws could increase our operations and product costs; increase the
complexities of product design, procurement, and manufacturing; limit our ability to manage excess
and obsolete non-compliant inventory; limit our sales activities; and impact our future financial
results. Any violation of these laws can subject us to significant liability, including fines,
penalties, and prohibiting sales of our products into one or more states or countries, and result
in a material adverse effect on our financial condition.
If we are unable to protect our intellectual property, we may lose a competitive advantage or incur
substantial litigation costs to protect our rights.
Our future success depends upon our proprietary technology. Our protective measures, including
patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secret protection, and internet identity registrations, may
prove inadequate to protect our proprietary rights and market advantage. The right to stop others
from misusing our trademarks and service marks in commerce depends to some extent on our ability to
show evidence of enforcement of our rights against such misuse in commerce. Our efforts to stop
improper use, if insufficient, may lead to loss of trademark and service mark rights, brand loyalty
and notoriety among our customers and prospective customers. The scope of any patent to which we
have or may obtain rights may not prevent others from developing and selling competing products.
The validity and breadth of claims covered in technology patents involve complex legal and factual
questions, and the resolution of such claims may be highly uncertain, lengthy and expensive. In
addition, our patents may be held invalid upon challenge, or others may claim rights in or
ownership of our patents.
We have a judgment of patent infringement against Stinger Systems as to our U.S. patent
6,999,295, claims 2 and 40. The validity of claims 2 and 40 of U.S. patent 6,999,295 is being
re-examined by the USPTO in an ex parte proceeding. The outcome of this proceeding cannot be
predicted. Stinger Systems has sold its business to Karbon Arms. Delays in obtaining the product
of Karbon Arms for infringement analysis may delay our ability to stop unlawful competition.
17
Table of Contents
We may be subject to intellectual property infringement claims, which could cause us to incur
litigation costs and divert management attention from our business.
Any intellectual property infringement claims against us, with or without merit, could be
costly and time-consuming to defend and divert our managements attention from our business. If our
products were found to infringe a third partys proprietary rights, we could be forced to enter
into costly royalty or licensing agreements in order to be able to sell our products or discontinue
use of the protected technology. Such royalty and licensing agreements may not be available on
terms acceptable to us or at all.
If we face competition in foreign countries, we can enforce patent rights only in the jurisdictions
in which our patent applications have been granted.
Our U.S. patents protect us from imported infringing products coming into the U.S. from
abroad. Applications for patents in a few foreign countries have been made; however, these may be
inadequate to protect markets for our products in other foreign countries. Each foreign patent is
examined and granted according to the law of the country where it was filed independent of whether
a U.S. patent on similar technology was granted. A patent in a foreign country may be subject to
cancellation if the claimed invention is not worked in that country. Meeting the requirements of
working the invention differs by country and ranges from sales in the country to manufacturing in
the country. U.S. export law or the laws of some foreign countries may prohibit us from satisfying
the requirements for working the invention, creating a risk that some of our foreign patents may
become unenforceable.
Our efforts to avoid the patent, trademark, and copyright rights of others may not provide notice
to us of potential infringements in time to avoid investing in product development and promotion
that must later be abandoned if suitable license terms cannot be reached.
There is no guarantee that our use of conventional technology searching and brand clearance
searching will identify all potential rights holders. Rights holders may demand payment for past
infringements and/or force us to accept costly license terms or discontinue use of protected
technology and/or works of authorship that may include, for example, photos, videos, and software.
Our current research and development focus on developing software-based products increases this
risk.
Government regulations applied to our products may affect our markets for these products.
We rely on the opinions of The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, including the
determination that a device that has projectiles propelled by the release of compressed gas in
place of the expanding gases from ignited gunpowder, are not classified as firearms. Changes in
statutes, regulations, and interpretation outside of our control may result in our products being
classified or reclassified as firearms. Our private citizen market could be substantially reduced
if consumers are required to obtain a registration to own a firearm prior to purchasing our
products.
Defects in our products could reduce demand for our products and result in a loss of sales, delay
in market acceptance and injury to our reputation.
Complex components and assemblies used in our products may contain undetected defects that are
subsequently discovered at any point in the life of the product. Defects in our products may result
in a loss of sales, delay in market acceptance, injury to our reputation and increased warranty
costs which could have a material adverse effect on profitability and financial condition
We face risks associated with rapid technological change and new competing products.
The technology associated with non-lethal devices is receiving significant attention and is
rapidly evolving. While we have patent protection in key areas of electro-muscular disruption
technology, it is possible that new non-lethal technology may result in competing products that
operate outside our patents and could present significant competition for our products.
18
Table of Contents
Our dependence on third party suppliers for key components of our devices could delay shipment of
our products and reduce our sales.
We depend on certain domestic and foreign suppliers for the delivery of components used in the
assembly of our products. Our reliance on third-party suppliers creates risks related to our
potential inability to obtain an adequate supply of components or sub-assemblies and reduced
control over pricing and timing of delivery of components and sub-assemblies. Specifically, we
depend on suppliers of sub-assemblies, machined parts, injection molded plastic parts, printed
circuit boards, custom wire fabrications and other miscellaneous customer parts for our products.
We do not have long-term agreements with any of our suppliers and there is no guarantee that supply
will not be interrupted. Any interruption of supply for any material components of our products
could significantly delay the shipment of our products and have a material adverse effect on our
revenues, profitability and financial condition.
Component shortages could result in our inability to produce volume to adequately meet customer
demand, which could result in a loss of sales, delay in deliveries and injury to our reputation.
Single or sole-source components used in the manufacture of our products may become
unavailable or discontinued. Delays caused by industry allocations or obsolescence may take weeks
or months to resolve. In some cases, parts obsolescence may require a product re-design to ensure
quality replacement components. These delays could cause significant delays in manufacturing and
loss of sales, leading to adverse effects significantly impacting our financial condition or
results of operations.
Our dependence on foreign suppliers for key components of our products could delay shipment of our
finished products and reduce our sales.
We depend on foreign suppliers for the delivery of certain components used in the assembly of
our products. Due to changes imposed for imports of foreign products into the United States, as
well as potential port closures and delays created by terrorist threats, public health issues or
national disasters, we are exposed to risk of delays caused by freight carriers or customs
clearance issues for our imported parts. Delays caused by our inability to obtain components for
assembly could have a material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and financial
condition.
We may experience a decline in gross margins due to rising raw material and transportation costs
associated with a future increase in petroleum prices.
A significant number of our raw materials are comprised of petroleum-based products, or incur
some form of landed cost associated with transporting the raw materials or components to our
facility. A significant rise in oil prices could adversely impact our ability to sustain current
gross margins, by increasing component pricing.
Catastrophic events may disrupt our business.
A disruption or failure of our systems or operations in the event of a major earthquake,
weather event, cyber-attack, terrorist attack, or other catastrophic event could cause delays in
completing sales, providing services, or performing other mission-critical functions. Our
software-related research and development and primary EVIDENCE.COM data center are located in
Southern California, located near major earthquake faults. A catastrophic event that results in the
destruction or disruption of any of our critical business or information technology systems could
harm our ability to conduct normal business operations and our operating results.
Security vulnerabilities in our EVIDENCE.COM service could lead to reduced revenues or to liability claims.
Maintaining the security of our EVIDENCE.COM computer equipment, networks, and the evidentiary data stored
and managed on them is a critical issue for us and our customers. Hackers may develop and deploy viruses,
worms, and other malicious software programs that attack or gain access to our networks and data centers.
We devote significant resources to engineer secure products and ensure security vulnerabilities are mitigated.
Despite these efforts, any actual or perceived security vulnerabilities in our service could lead some customers
to seek to cancel service, to reduce or delay future purchases, or to use competing products. In addition, if third
parties gain access to our networks or data centers they could attempt to obtain, tamper with, or destroy evidentiary
data related to ongoing criminal or other legal investigations. Any actual or perceived vulnerabilities in these
circumstances may lead to claims against us.
We may experience outages and disruptions of our EVIDENCE.COM service if we fail to maintain an
adequate operations infrastructure.
We anticipate increasing user traffic related to the introduction of EVIDENCE.COM. The
complexity of this SaaS product will demand significant computing power. We have spent and expect
to continue to spend substantial amounts to purchase or lease data centers and equipment and to
upgrade our technology and network infrastructure to handle an anticipated increase in traffic.
This expansion is expensive, complex, and could result in inefficiencies or operational failures,
which could diminish the quality of our products, services, and user experience, resulting in
damage to our reputation and loss of current and potential users, subscribers, and advertisers,
harming our operating results and financial condition.
19
Table of Contents
Our revenues and operating results may fluctuate unexpectedly from quarter to quarter, which may
cause our stock price to decline.
Our revenues and operating results have varied significantly in the past and may vary
significantly in the future due to various factors, including, but not limited to:
| budgetary cycles of municipal, state and federal law enforcement and corrections agencies |
||
| market acceptance of our products and services |
||
| the timing of large domestic and international orders |
||
| the outcome of any existing or future litigation |
||
| adverse publicity surrounding our products, the safety of our products, or the use of our products |
||
| changes in our sales mix |
||
| new product introduction costs |
||
| increased raw material expenses |
||
| changes in our operating expenses |
||
| regulatory changes that may affect the marketability of our products |
As a result of these and other factors, we believe that period-to-period comparisons of our
operating results may not be meaningful in the short term, and our performance in a particular
period may not be indicative of our performance in any future period.
Foreign currency fluctuations may affect our competitiveness and sales in foreign markets.
The relative change in currency values creates fluctuations in our product pricing for
potential international customers. These changes in foreign end-user costs may result in lost
orders and reduce the competitiveness of our products in certain foreign markets. These changes may
also negatively affect the financial condition of some existing or potential foreign customers and
reduce or eliminate their future orders of our products.
We maintain all of our cash, cash equivalent and short-term investment balances, some of which are
not insured, at two depository institutions.
We maintain the majority of our cash and cash equivalent accounts at two depository
institutions. As of December 31, 2010, our aggregate balances in such accounts were $42.7 million.
Of such amount, $250,000 was covered by Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insurance,
while the remaining amounts were not insured as of the end of fiscal 2010.
We could suffer losses with respect to the uninsured balances if the depositary institutions
failed and the institutions assets were insufficient to cover its deposits and/or the Federal
government did not take actions to support deposits in excess of existing FDIC insurance limits.
Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, financial condition and
results of operations.
We depend on our ability to attract and retain our key management and technical personnel.
Our success depends upon the continued service of our key management personnel. Our success
also depends on our ability to continue to attract, retain and motivate qualified technical
personnel. Although we have employment agreements with certain of our officers, the employment of
such persons is at-will and either we or the employee can terminate the employment relationship
at any time, subject to the applicable terms of the employment agreements. The competition for our
key employees is intense. The loss of the service of one or more of our key personnel could harm
our business.
20
Table of Contents
Item 1B. | Unresolved Staff Comments |
None.
Item 2. | Properties |
Our corporate headquarters and manufacturing facilities are based in a 100,000 square foot
facility in Scottsdale, Arizona, which we own. We also lease premises in Carpenteria, California,
the Washington D.C. area and Frankfurt, Germany. We believe our existing facilities are well
maintained and in good operating condition. We also believe we have adequate manufacturing capacity
for our existing product lines for the foreseeable future. To the extent that we introduce new
products in the future, we will likely need to acquire additional facilities to locate the
associated production lines. However, we believe we can acquire or lease such facilities on
reasonable terms. The Company continues to make investments in capital equipment as needed to meet
anticipated demand for its products.
Item 3. | Legal Proceedings |
See discussion of litigation in Note 7(c) to the consolidated financial statements included in
Part II, Item 8 of this annual report.
Item 4. | Removed and Reserved |
PART II
Item 5. | Market for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of
Equity Securities |
Market Information
Our common stock is quoted under the symbol TASR on The NASDAQ Global Select Market. The
closing price of our common stock on March 10, 2011 was $4.09 per share.
The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices per share for our common stock as
reported by NASDAQ for each quarter of the last two fiscal years.
Common Stock TASR
Fiscal Quarters Ended | High | Low | ||||||
March 31, 2009 |
$ | 5.88 | $ | 3.11 | ||||
June 30, 2009 |
$ | 5.43 | $ | 4.04 | ||||
September 30, 2009 |
$ | 5.70 | $ | 4.16 | ||||
December 31, 2009 |
$ | 4.77 | $ | 3.94 | ||||
March 31, 2010 |
$ | 7.88 | $ | 4.41 | ||||
June 30, 2010 |
$ | 5.97 | $ | 3.79 | ||||
September 30, 2010 |
$ | 4.62 | $ | 3.52 | ||||
December 31, 2010 |
$ | 5.10 | $ | 3.61 |
Holders
As
of March 10, 2011, there were approximately 349 holders of record of our common stock.
Dividends
To date, we have not declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock. We do not intend to
pay cash dividends in the foreseeable future and our revolving line of credit prohibits the payment
of cash dividends.
21
Table of Contents
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
We did not repurchase any shares of our common stock in 2010. For more information about our stock
repurchase program, announced in March 2011, refer to Note 14 in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report. For information about a stock
option exchange program that we completed in December 2010, refer to Note 10 (d) in Part II, Item 8
of this Annual Report.
Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities
No unregistered securities were sold by us in 2010.
Stock Performance Graph
The following stock performance graph compares the performance of our common stock to the
NASDAQ Stock Market (U.S.) and the Russell 3000 Index. The graph covers the period from December
31, 2005 to December 31, 2010. The graph assumes that the value of the investment in our stock and
in each index was $100 at December 31, 2005 and that all dividends were reinvested. We do not pay
dividends on our common stock.
COMPARISON OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
Among TASER International, Inc., The NASDAQ Composite Index
And The Russell 3000 Index
Among TASER International, Inc., The NASDAQ Composite Index
And The Russell 3000 Index
* | $100 invested on 12/31/05 in stock & index-including reinvestment of dividends. |
Fiscal year ending December 31:
2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | |||||||||||||||||||
TASER International, In |
100.00 | 109.34 | 206.75 | 75.86 | 62.93 | 67.53 | ||||||||||||||||||
NASDAQ Composite |
100.00 | 111.74 | 124.67 | 73.77 | 107.12 | 125.93 | ||||||||||||||||||
Russell 3000 |
100.00 | 115.71 | 121.66 | 76.27 | 97.89 | 114.46 |
22
Table of Contents
Item 6. | Selected Financial Data |
The following selected financial data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated
financial statements and the notes thereto, and with Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. The statement of operations data for the years
ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 and the balance sheet data as of December 31, 2010 and 2009
have been derived from and should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial
statements and the notes thereto included herein. The statement of operations data for the years
ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 and the balance sheet data as of December 31, 2008, 2007 and 2006
is derived from audited consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto which are not
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | ||||||||||||||||
Statement of Operations Data |
||||||||||||||||||||
Net sales |
$ | 86,930,019 | $ | 104,251,560 | $ | 92,845,490 | $ | 100,727,191 | $ | 67,717,851 | ||||||||||
Gross margin |
45,366,875 | 63,402,409 | 57,004,227 | 57,559,819 | 43,179,061 | |||||||||||||||
Sales, general and
administrative expenses |
39,094,625 | 43,479,232 | 38,860,729 | 32,814,170 | 29,680,764 | |||||||||||||||
Research and development
expenses |
11,411,889 | 20,002,351 | 12,918,161 | 4,421,596 | 2,704,521 | |||||||||||||||
Shareholder litigation
settlement expense (a) |
| | | | 17,650,000 | |||||||||||||||
Income (loss) from operations |
(5,139,639 | ) | (79,174 | ) | 5,225,337 | 20,324,053 | (6,856,224 | ) | ||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
(4,384,435 | ) | (1,106 | ) | 3,637,041 | 15,026,476 | (4,087,679 | ) | ||||||||||||
Income (loss) per common and
common equivalent shares |
||||||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.00 | ) | $ | 0.06 | $ | 0.24 | $ | (0.07 | ) | |||||||
Diluted |
$ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.00 | ) | $ | 0.06 | $ | 0.23 | $ | (0.07 | ) | |||||||
Weighted average number of
common and common equivalent
shares outstanding |
||||||||||||||||||||
Basic |
62,524,446 | 61,920,094 | 62,371,004 | 62,621,174 | 61,984,240 | |||||||||||||||
Diluted |
62,524,446 | 61,920,094 | 64,070,869 | 65,685,667 | 61,984,240 | |||||||||||||||
As of December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | 2007 | 2006 | ||||||||||||||||
Balance Sheet Data |
||||||||||||||||||||
Working capital |
$ | 70,378,201 | $ | 72,100,393 | $ | 80,642,516 | $ | 83,953,166 | $ | 37,813,576 | ||||||||||
Total assets |
136,186,935 | 138,425,917 | 130,015,506 | 137,763,401 | 119,837,689 | |||||||||||||||
Total current liabilities |
11,947,994 | 13,784,853 | 10,956,199 | 12,473,616 | 18,302,688 | |||||||||||||||
Total long
term debt and capital leases |
| | | 11,695 | 230,973 | |||||||||||||||
Total stockholders equity |
$ | 117,564,241 | $ | 117,701,196 | $ | 112,526,262 | $ | 120,636,750 | $ | 99,328,539 |
a) | In 2006, we reached an agreement to settle our securities class action and shareholder
derivative lawsuits. |
23
Table of Contents
Item 7. | Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD&A) is
designed to provide a reader of our consolidated financial statements with a narrative from the
perspective of our management on our financial condition, results of operations, liquidity and
certain other factors that may affect our future results. Our MD&A is presented in seven sections:
| Executive Overview and Key Strategic Initiatives |
| 2010 Overview |
| Results of Operations |
| Liquidity and Capital Resources |
| Contractual Obligations |
| Off Balance Sheet Arrangements |
| Critical Accounting Estimates |
Our MD&A should be read in conjunction with the other sections of this annual report on Form
10-K, including Part I, Item 1A: Risk Factors Part II, Item 6: Selected Financial Data and
Part II, Item 8: Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. The various sections of this MD&A
contain a number of forward-looking statements, all of which are based on our current expectations
and could be affected by the uncertainties and risk factors described throughout this filing.
Executive Overview and Key Strategic Initiatives
Our core mission is to protect life, prevent conflict and resolve disputes through
technologies that make communities safer. We are a market leader in the development and manufacture
of advanced electronic control devices (ECDs) designed for use in the law enforcement, military,
corrections, private security and personal defense markets.
Our mission to protect life has also been extended to prevent conflict and resolve disputes.
We have learned that bringing a subject into custody is not the end of the challenge for law
enforcement. In fact, it is typically just the beginning since a significant number of incidents
that start as a physical conflict transition into a legal conflict. Whether its prosecuting and
convicting the individual arrested, or responding to excessive use of force allegations, the
post-incident legal process is a considerable part of the challenge law enforcement faces on a
continual basis and can often take years and millions of litigation dollars to resolve in the
courtroom. To help law enforcement address this challenge, we have developed a fully integrated
hardware and software solution that will provide our law enforcement customers the capabilities to
capture, store, manage, share and analyze video and other digital evidence. Finally, the optimum
situation is to have prevented the conflict from ever escalating. TASER ECDs and AXON on-officer
video have a measured and positive effect on better suspect and officer behavior, as well as
achieving compliance without escalation of force.
TASER solutions deliver significant results to our customers and to communities in which they
are deployed. With over 275 independent studies confirming the safety of TASER ECDs relative to
other force options, TASER ECDs have proven a safer alternative to other uses of force in
situations of conflict. Further, most reporting agencies demonstrate overall decreases in use of
force, and decreases in suspect and officer injuries resulting from conflict. Reducing uses of
force and gaining compliance by use of a TASER ECD has provided significant reductions in workers
compensation expenses and claims for excessive use of force for agencies, cities and taxpayers.
Technological innovation is the foundation for our long-term growth and we intend to maintain
our commitment to the research and development of our technology for both new and existing products
that further our mission. At the same time we have established industry leading training services
to provide our users a comprehensive overview of legal and policy issues, medical information and
risk mitigation relating to our ECDs and the use of force. We have built a network of distribution
channels for selling and marketing our products and services to law enforcement agencies, primarily
in North America, with ongoing focus and effort placed on expanding these programs in
international, military and other markets. Over 16,000 law enforcement agencies in over 40
countries have made initial purchases of our TASER brand devices for testing or deployment. To
date, we do not know of any significant sales of any competing ECD products.
24
Table of Contents
Our key strategies include:
| Increase market penetration in both the United States and international law enforcement
markets. We believe that a large portion of these markets that do not currently use our
products continue to present an opportunity for future growth, particularly with respect to
international law enforcement agencies where there remains a significant opportunity for
more widespread adoption. In recent years we have seen international markets become
increasingly significant and we seek to maintain that trend as we demonstrate the benefits
of large-scale adoptions of our ECDs, using countries such as the U.K and Australia as
benchmarks of successful programs. Given the sales cycle to break into a new international
market can be as long as 18 24 months, it is important that we continue to develop our
pipeline in terms of both the number and size of opportunities. |
| Focus on the significant opportunity of re-selling into our existing large installed
base of law enforcement customers. TASER ECDs are sophisticated electronic devices that are
regularly subjected to the harsh environment of law enforcement, security and the military.
We design and manufacture our ECDs to be as robust as we can make them. However, these
electronic systems are dropped, jarred about on an officers belt, used in violent
confrontations, and exposed to extreme heat, cold, rain and dust all of which can
contribute to general wear and tear on the high voltage component. Taking into account all
of the factors and based on our years of field experience, we recommend that the general
useful life of a TASER handheld ECD is 5 years. With many early adopters still utilizing
ECDs purchased in 2003, 2004 and 2005, we believe there exists a significant number of our
customers that recognize they need to consider either a model upgrade from the Advanced
TASER to the X26 or X3, or purchasing replacement ECDs to refresh the aging profile of the
TASER ECD handles they have in field use. |
| Further develop our presence in federal government and military markets. We intend to
continue to place a strong emphasis on supporting our military customers through our
Government and Military Programs business group and our Senior Executive Advisory Group
(SEAG) comprised of a team of professionals with extensive military, homeland defense and
law enforcement experience with the purpose of advising on business development in support
of military users. The primary focus of these groups is placed on supporting military use
for our existing hardware as well as increasing technology development through contracted
support. |
| Focus on increasing sales of AXON and EVIDENCE.COM. We completed a number of field
trials of the AXON and EVIDENCE.COM throughout 2010 and began to make some initial sales.
We anticipate an increasing volume of similar trial programs in 2011 and believe these
trial programs are the best way for our customers to see the powerful capabilities,
benefits and compelling value proposition of this technology for themselves, and will help
to achieve more revenue for these products in 2011. |
| Continued investment in development of innovative new products, which both complement
and add to our existing platforms. We anticipate our research and development efforts in
2011 will primarily be focused on the next generation of ECD hardware, and we are
continuing to devote resources to refine and improve both AXON and EVIDENCE.COM with new
and enhanced features. |
| Operational excellence leverage existing cost structure and human capital to move the
Company towards the next phase of revenue growth and enhanced profitability. |
| Continued application for patents and intellectual property rights, both in the U.S and
internationally, to protect key technology in our products and further attempt to protect
our competitive position. |
| Continued aggressive litigation defense to protect our brand equity. We have assembled a
team of world class medical experts and hired additional internal legal resources to
provide an efficient means of defending the Company against product liability claims. We
view a continued record of successful litigation defense as a key factor for our long-term
growth and success. |
2010 Overview
As with the broader economy, 2010 proved to be a challenging year for us and our customers.
Much of the domestic stimulus spending available in 2009 was substantially exhausted by 2010 and
our core law enforcement customers faced significant economic constraints with imposed budget cuts
requiring force reductions. In a declining revenue environment, we focused on becoming a more
efficient and effective enterprise by making changes to streamline our cost structure. We believe
we can sustain our more efficient cost structure to conserve resources and establish a platform to
provide leverage that returns us to profitability on future sales growth as the economy continues
to recover. These initiatives delivered a 10% reduction in SG&A costs, and a 43% reduction in R&D
in 2010, which also decreased as we completed a significant investment period in 2008 and 2009 to
develop AXON, EVIDENCE.COM and other products. Management believes that its ability to achieve a
balance between growing our core business and building the foundations for future growth is the key
to increasing long-term shareholder value. Our 2010 performance and the long-term initiatives we
have put in place reflect our continuing commitment to achieving this balance.
25
Table of Contents
Results of Operations
The following table presents data from our statements of operations as well as the percentage
relationship to total net revenues of items included in our statements of operations (dollars in
thousands):
Year ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Net sales |
$ | 86,930 | 100 | % | $ | 104,252 | 100 | % | $ | 92,845 | 100 | % | ||||||||||||
Cost of products sold |
41,563 | 48 | % | 40,850 | 39 | % | 35,841 | 39 | % | |||||||||||||||
Gross margin |
45,367 | 52 | % | 63,402 | 61 | % | 57,004 | 61 | % | |||||||||||||||
Sales, general and administrative expenses |
39,095 | 45 | % | 43,479 | 42 | % | 38,861 | 42 | % | |||||||||||||||
Research and development expenses |
11,412 | 13 | % | 20,002 | 19 | % | 12,918 | 14 | % | |||||||||||||||
Income (loss) from operations |
(5,140 | ) | -6 | % | (79 | ) | * | 5,225 | 6 | % | ||||||||||||||
Interest and other income, net |
26 | * | 170 | * | 1,718 | 2 | % | |||||||||||||||||
Income (loss) before income taxes |
(5,114 | ) | -6 | % | 91 | * | 6,943 | 7 | % | |||||||||||||||
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
(729 | ) | -1 | % | 92 | * | 3,306 | 4 | % | |||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | (4,384 | ) | -5 | % | $ | (1 | ) | * | $ | 3,637 | 4 | % | |||||||||||
* | less than 1% |
Net Sales
For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, sales by product line and by geography
were as follows (dollars in thousands):
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Sales by Product Line |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
TASER X26 |
$ | 41,290 | 47 | % | $ | 53,996 | 52 | % | $ | 51,733 | 56 | % | ||||||||||||
TASER C2 |
3,779 | 4 | % | 4,929 | 5 | % | 6,127 | 7 | % | |||||||||||||||
TASER Cam |
4,026 | 5 | % | 3,087 | 3 | % | 3,304 | 4 | % | |||||||||||||||
ADVANCED TASER M26 & M18 |
2,686 | 3 | % | 3,693 | 4 | % | 3,422 | 4 | % | |||||||||||||||
Single Cartridges |
21,979 | 25 | % | 27,908 | 27 | % | 20,526 | 22 | % | |||||||||||||||
TASER X3 |
2,305 | 3 | % | 746 | * | | | |||||||||||||||||
TASER XREP |
1,306 | 2 | % | 549 | * | | | |||||||||||||||||
AXON/Evidence.com |
307 | * | | | | |||||||||||||||||||
Shockwave |
64 | * | 51 | * | | | ||||||||||||||||||
Other |
9,188 | 11 | % | 9,293 | 9 | % | 7,733 | 8 | % | |||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 86,930 | 100 | % | $ | 104,252 | 100 | % | $ | 92,845 | 100 | % | ||||||||||||
* less than 1% | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Sales by Geographic Area |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
United States |
79 | % | 78 | % | 82 | % | ||||||||||||||||||
Other Countries |
21 | % | 22 | % | 18 | % | ||||||||||||||||||
Total |
100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | ||||||||||||||||||
Net sales for the year ended December 31, 2010 were $86.9 million, a decrease of
$17.3 million, or 17%, compared to $104.3 million in 2009. The decrease in 2010 was primarily
volume driven with fewer individually significant international and Federal orders in 2010 as sales
in 2009 included follow-on orders to larger customers in these market
segments. Domestic law enforcement sales also
declined over the prior year as agencies continue to operate with budget constraints in prevailing
adverse economic conditions and did not have the level of stimulus funds that were available in
2009. This resulted in reduced sales of the TASER X26 product line which decreased by $12.7
million, or 24%, to $41.3 million in 2010 compared to $54.0 million in 2009. Single cartridge sales
also decreased by $6.0 million, or 21% to $22.0 million in 2010 compared to $27.9 million in 2009.
Sales of our TASER C2 consumer product also declined by $1.2 million, or 23%, due to the negative
impact of the economic downturn on consumer spending. Offsetting these decreases, TASER CAM sales
increased $0.9 million driven by a large international order in the first quarter of 2010. Sales of
new products, including AXON, EVIDENCE.COM, XREP, X3 and Shockwave, also contributed $4.2 million
in sales in 2010. Other sales, which include training, extended warranty, out of warranty repair
revenues and government grant revenues decreased $0.1 million over the prior year.
26
Table of Contents
Net sales increased $11.4 million, or 12%, to $104.3 million in 2009 compared to $92.8 million
in 2008. The growth in 2009 was primarily driven by significant international shipments during the
year and sales to federal law enforcement / military customers. The growth in
international and Federal business in 2009 offset a decline in domestic sales, which reflected
lower municipal spending in the U.S. as agencies reassigned budget dollars due to economic
constraints. This resulted in higher sales of the TASER X26 product line which increased $2.3
million, or 4%, to $54.0 million in 2009 compared to $51.7 million in 2008, and a $7.4 million, or
36%, increase in single cartridge sales which grew to $27.9 million in 2009 compared to $20.5
million in 2008. Sales of the ADVANCED TASER increased by $0.3 million, while the introduction of
three new product lines, TASER X3, TASER XREP and Shockwave contributed $1.3 million in 2009.
Offsetting these increases, sales of the TASER C2 consumer product declined $1.2 million,
attributable to the adverse impact of the economic downturn on consumer spending. The increase in
other sales is primarily driven by growth in extended warranty revenues, out of warranty repairs
and the elimination of distributor discounts during 2008. Other sales also include government
grants, training and shipping revenues.
International sales for 2010 and 2009 represented approximately $18.3 million, or 21% of total
net sales, and $22.7 million or 22% of total net sales, respectively. International sales
represented approximately $17.0 million or 18% of total net sales in 2008. While international
sales declined in 2010, we remain focused on continuing to expand our customer base in countries
outside the United States.
Cost of Products Sold
Cost of products sold increased by $0.8 million, or 2%, to $41.6 million in 2010 compared to
$40.8 million in 2009. As a percentage of net sales, cost of products sold increased to 48% in 2010
compared to 39% in 2009. The increase in cost of products sold as a percentage of net sales in 2010
compared to 2009 was driven by a combination of factors. Approximately $3.2 million, representing a
4% increase in costs as a percentage of sales, of EVIDENCE.com data center operating and software
maintenance costs are included in cost of product sold in 2010 following the commercial
availability of the service, whereas such costs were included in research and development expenses
in 2009 while we were in the development phase. Direct manufacturing costs increased as a
percentage of net sales due to a less favorable product and market segment sales mix, attributable
to a reduction in sales of our higher margin X26 product and lower international sales. This was
combined with lower initial margins on the AXON, XREP and X3 product lines, an increase in value
engineering related rework costs and increases in packaging material costs. Direct labor also
increased as a percentage of sales due to the overall higher cost of using temporary labor in 2010,
partially offset by efficiencies gained from cartridge automation equipment, while leverage on
relatively fixed indirect manufacturing expenses has been reduced as sales decreased 17% compared
to the prior year. In addition to reduced leverage, the total pool of indirect manufacturing
expenses increased in 2010 compared to the prior year due to a $2.4 million increase in
depreciation expense for our automated cartridge and new product production equipment,
approximately $1.1 million in inventory write-off charges related to parts made obsolete from the
move to automated cartridge production and some employee severance charges.
Cost of products sold increased by $5.0 million, or 14%, to $40.8 million in 2009 compared to
$35.8 million in 2008. As a percentage of net sales, cost of products sold remained flat at 39% in
both 2009 and 2008. Direct manufacturing costs decreased slightly as a percentage of sales
primarily driven by negotiated supplier price reductions in certain raw material components being
partially offset by a less favorable sales mix weighted towards lower margin products. Direct labor
also decreased as a percentage of net sales due to the initial impact of automated cartridge
production in the fourth quarter of 2009. Offsetting the decrease in direct manufacturing costs,
indirect manufacturing expenses increased attributable to a lower absorption of indirect
manufacturing costs to inventory resulting from a decline in the overall number of production hours
in 2009 compared to 2008. Additionally, depreciation expense related to new automation equipment,
and freight costs increased. These increases in indirect manufacturing costs were offset by a
reduction in scrap, count discrepancies and engineering supplies.
Gross Margin
Gross margin decreased $18.0 million, or 28%, to $45.4 million in 2010 compared to $63.4
million in 2009. As a percentage of net sales, gross margins decreased to 52% in 2010 compared to
61% in 2009. The decline in gross margin as a percentage of net sales in 2010 reflects a decrease
in leverage due to lower sales levels as well as the other factors noted above under the discussion
of cost of products sold.
Gross margin increased $6.4 million, or 11%, to $63.4 million in 2009 compared to $57.0
million in 2008. As a percentage of net sales, gross margin remained flat at 61% for both 2009 and
2008.
27
Table of Contents
Sales, General and Administrative Expenses
For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, sales, general and administrative
expenses were comprised as follows (dollars in thousands):
Year Ended December 31, | Year Ended December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
$ | % | $ | % | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | Change | Change | 2009 | 2008 | Change | Change | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Salaries, benefits and bonus |
$ | 10,586 | $ | 11,335 | $ | (749 | ) | -7 | % | $ | 11,335 | $ | 9,349 | $ | 1,986 | 21 | % | |||||||||||||||
Stock based compensation |
2,728 | 3,219 | (491 | ) | -15 | % | 3,219 | 1,552 | 1,667 | 107 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Legal, professional and accounting |
5,187 | 6,081 | (894 | ) | -15 | % | 6,081 | 5,899 | 182 | 3 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Sales and Marketing |
4,152 | 5,356 | (1,204 | ) | -22 | % | 5,356 | 5,071 | 285 | 6 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Consulting and lobbying services |
2,872 | 3,863 | (991 | ) | -26 | % | 3,863 | 3,478 | 385 | 11 | % | |||||||||||||||||||||
Travel and meals |
2,956 | 3,308 | (352 | ) | -11 | % | 3,308 | 3,739 | (431 | ) | -12 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
2,023 | 1,896 | 127 | 7 | % | 1,896 | 1,635 | 261 | 16 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||
D&O and liability insurance |
1,613 | 1,812 | (199 | ) | -11 | % | 1,812 | 2,191 | (379 | ) | -17 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Other |
6,978 | 6,609 | 369 | 6 | % | 6,609 | 5,947 | 662 | 11 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 39,095 | $ | 43,479 | $ | (4,384 | ) | -10 | % | $ | 43,479 | $ | 38,861 | $ | 4,618 | 12 | % | |||||||||||||||
Sales, general and administrative
as percentage of net sales |
45 | % | 42 | % | 42 | % | 42 | % |
Sales, general and administrative expenses were $39.1 million and $43.5 million in
2010 and 2009, respectively, a decrease of $4.4 million, or 10%. As a percentage of total net
sales, sales, general and administrative expenses increased to 45% in 2010 compared to 42% in 2009,
a function of reduced leverage resulting from a 17% decrease in sales. The dollar decrease in 2010
over the same period in 2009 is attributable to a number of cost control measures undertaken during
the year which resulted in a $1.0 million decrease in consulting and lobbying primarily related to
strategic marketing and IT efforts incurred in the prior year; a $0.9 million decrease in legal,
professional and accounting fees driven by the timing of outstanding litigation in progress and
efforts to efficiently manage outside legal costs; and general reductions in discretionary spending
in sales and marketing, including advertising and tradeshows, and travel as we have increased our
focus on controlling costs. Salaries, benefits and bonus were also decreased due to the impact of
headcount reductions. These decreases in SG&A expense were partially offset by a charge of
approximately $1.0 million relating to a litigation settlement for an officer injury during arrest
claim, included in other expense, and $0.5 million of employee severance costs, included in
salaries, benefits and bonuses, as we took measures to reduce our salaried headcount and fixed cost
infrastructure. Other expense in 2009 included a $0.4 million settlement payment paid to a former
board member as described in Note 11 under the heading
Settlement Agreement.
Sales, general and administrative expenses were $43.5 million and $38.9 million in 2009 and
2008, respectively, an increase of $4.6 million, or 12%. As a percentage of total net sales, sales,
general and administrative expenses remained flat at 42% for both 2009 and 2008. The dollar
increase during 2009 over the same period in 2008 is attributable to a $2.0 million growth in
salaries, benefits and bonus; related to an increase in personnel to support the expansion of our
business infrastructure as we introduce new products and enter new markets. Stock-based
compensation expense also increased $1.7 million related to a full years expense for some large
stock option grants during the third and fourth quarters of 2008 as well as new employee stock
options grants in 2009. Consulting and lobbying services increased $0.4 million primarily related
to strategic selling and marketing, advertising and IT process improvement related efforts while
legal, professional and accounting fees remained flat as lower legal fees, driven by the timing of
outstanding ligation in progress, were offset by higher accounting fees. Sales and marketing
expenses also increased by a net amount of $0.3 million as increases in our tradeshow costs and our
selling costs in support of new product introductions were partially offset by a $1.3 million
decrease in general media advertising spend primarily due to $0.6 million of infomercial production
costs expensed in the first quarter of 2008 as well as reduced emphasis placed on consumer
marketing programs. The $0.7 million increase in other costs was primarily driven by a $0.4 million
settlement expense paid to a Board member in 2009 as well as increased computer licensing and
maintenance costs.
28
Table of Contents
Research and Development Expenses
Research and development expenses decreased $8.6 million, or 43%, to $11.4 million in 2010
compared to $20.0 in 2009. The net decrease is a combination of a $4.9 million reduction in
indirect supplies and tooling attributable to the intensive hardware development for X3 and AXON
conducted in 2009, which were needed in order to expedite development for product demonstrations at
the TASER Conference and the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) trade shows.
Approximately $3.2 million of EVIDENCE.COM data center and software maintenance related costs,
including salary related costs, consulting, equipment leasing, rent and other overheads, were
included in cost of products sold in 2010 following the commercial availability of the platform.
These costs were included in research and development in the prior year while the platform was in
the development phase. Salary and stock-based compensation expense have also generally been reduced
following some headcount reductions and cancellation and forfeiture of performance-related stock
options, while consulting and travel expenses have decreased in line with cost containment efforts.
Partially offsetting these reductions, capitalized internal salary and consulting costs for
EVIDENCE.com development decreased by $1.0 million from $2.3 million in 2009 to $1.3 million in
2010 following the go-live of the service in 2010.
Research and development expenses increased $7.1 million, or 55%, to $20.0 million in 2009
compared to $12.9 million in 2008. The increase is driven by a $3.6 million increase in salary and
benefits as we expanded our research and development headcount to support new product development,
including a dedicated SaaS development team. Stock-based compensation expenses increased $0.8
million for stock options granted in the second half of 2008 and in 2009. Indirect supplies and
tooling costs increased $2.9 million primarily associated with the development of the TASER X3,
AXON and EVIDENCE.com. In particular, during the third quarter of 2009, we expedited the build of
AXON and X3 prototype display units for the TASER Tactical Conference and the IACP conference.
These increases are offset by the capitalization of $2.3 million of internal salary and external
consulting costs specifically related to the development of EVIDENCE.com in 2009.
Interest and Other Income, Net
Interest and other income in both 2010 and 2009 were minimal due to the significant reduction
in available investment yields on our cash and investments.
Interest and other income decreased by $1.5 million, or 90%, to $0.2 million in 2009 compared
to $1.7 million in 2008. The decrease is attributable to a significantly lower average yield on our
cash and investments as well as a lower average cash and investment balance in 2009. Our cash and
investment accounts earned interest at an approximate rate of 0.30% during 2009, down from 2.5% in
2008. Additionally, other income in 2008 included $0.4 million related to unused deferred insurance
settlement proceeds recognized upon the dismissal of all final appeals in a personal injury case.
Provision for Income Taxes
The provision for income taxes decreased by $0.8 million to a benefit of $0.7 million in 2010
compared to a provision of $0.1 million in 2009. The effective income tax rate for 2010 was 14.3%
compared to 101% in 2009. The 2010 income tax rate is below the statutory rate primarily due to the
impact of non-deductible expenses for items such as ISO stock option expense, meals and
entertainment, and lobbying fees, which make our net loss for tax purposes significantly lower than
our book pre-tax loss. Additionally, we recorded in 2010 a tax provision amount related to a 2009
tax return to provision adjustment, primarily driven by lower than expected research and
development tax credits, which also reduced the net tax benefit and therefore the effective tax
rate.
The provision for income taxes decreased by $3.2 million to $0.1 million in 2009 compared to
$3.3 million in 2008. The effective income tax rate for 2009 was 101% compared to 48% for 2008. The
2009 effective tax rate is driven by the impact of non-deductible expenses for items such as ISO
stock option expense, meals and entertainment and lobbying expenses, making the income for tax
purposes higher than book pre-tax income which was close to break even for 2009.
Net Income (Loss)
The net loss increased to $4.4 million in 2010 compared to a net loss of $0.001 million in
2009. Net loss per basic and diluted share was $0.07 in 2010 compared to $0.00 loss per basic and
diluted in 2009.
Net income decreased by $3.6 million to break even (net loss of $0.001 million) in 2009
compared to net income of $3.6 million in 2008. Loss per basic and diluted share rounds to $0.00
for 2009 compared to income per basic and diluted share of $0.06 in 2008.
29
Table of Contents
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Summary
As of December 31, 2010, we had $42.7 million in cash and cash equivalents, a decrease of $2.8
million from the end of 2009 which is a function of investments in property and equipment and
capitalized software development, partially offset by cash generated from operations and funds
received from stock option exercise activity. Our overall net working capital decreased $1.7
million to $70.4 million at December 31, 2010 compared to $72.1 million at December 31, 2009.
Cash Flows
The following table summarizes our cash flows from operating, investing and financing activities
for each of the past three years ($ in thousands):
Year ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Total cash provided by (used in): |
||||||||||||
Operating activities |
$ | 732 | $ | 10,117 | $ | 8,118 | ||||||
Investing activities |
(4,472 | ) | (11,679 | ) | 8,117 | |||||||
Financing activities |
929 | 187 | (12,156 | ) | ||||||||
(Decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
$ | (2,811 | ) | $ | (1,375 | ) | $ | 4,079 | ||||
Operating Activities
Net cash provided by operating activities was $0.7 million in 2010, compared with $10.1
million in 2009 and $8.1 million in 2008.
Net cash provided by operating activities in 2010 of $0.7 million was primarily driven by our
net loss for the period of $4.4 million adjusted for the add-back of non-cash expenses, including
stock-based compensation expense of $3.7 million and depreciation and amortization expense of $7.3
million partially offset by a net reduction in working capital balances. Changes in working capital
include a $3.2 million reduction in accounts payable and accrued liabilities due to a reduction in
spending; timing of period end check runs and a vendor payment of $1.2 million for the final
installment on the cartridge automation equipment; a $4.0 million increase in inventory
attributable to our build up of ECD finished goods for future orders as well as raw materials
acquired for production of new products; and a $1.7 million increase in prepaid and other assets
from the funding of our annual liability insurance premiums, an increase in training and evaluation equipment assets, and an increase in our income taxes
receivable position at December 31, 2010. These net uses of cash were partially offset by a $1.8
million reduction in accounts receivable due to timing of collections and lower fourth quarter
sales levels.
Net cash provided by operating activities in 2009 of $10.1 million was driven by the net loss
for the period adjusted for the add back of non-cash expenses including stock-based compensation
expense of $5.0 million; depreciation and amortization expense of $3.6 million partially offset by
a $0.6 million net increase in deferred tax assets and provision for unrecognized tax benefits.
Changes in working capital include a $1.3 million decrease in accounts receivable, a function of
the timing of billing and collections; a $1.0 million decrease in prepaid and other assets due to a
difference in the timing of funding of our annual liability insurance premium; a $1.0 million
increase in accounts payable and accrued liabilities due to timing of year end check runs and a
$2.4 million increase in inventory, primarily driven by raw materials acquired for production of
new products.
Investing Activities
We used $4.5 million for investing activities in 2010, comprised principally of $2.2 million
for capitalized software development costs related to EVIDENCE.COM and our Protector technology
platform and $1.8 million for the acquisition of various production and computer equipment. We also
invested approximately $0.5 million in our intangible assets, principally new patent applications.
30
Table of Contents
We used $11.7 million for investing activities in 2009 comprised of $13.7 million in
acquisitions of property and equipment related to new automated cartridge production equipment,
production equipment for new product lines, computer equipment to establish the first EVIDENCE.COM
data center and capitalized software development costs. In addition, we invested $0.5 million in
intangible assets, primarily consisting of patent applications. These net uses were partially
offset by $2.5 million in net proceeds from short-term investments.
Financing activities
During 2010 and 2009, net cash provided by financing activities was $0.9 million and $0.2
million, respectively, primarily attributable to proceeds from stock options exercised.
Liquidity
Our most significant sources of liquidity continue to be funds generated by operating
activities and available cash and cash equivalents. We believe funds generated from our expected
results of operation as well as available cash and cash equivalents will be sufficient to finance
our operations and strategic initiatives for 2011. We dont expect our investment in capital
expenditures in 2011 to be significant or higher than 2010 levels.
In March 2011, we announced a stock repurchase program to acquire up to $12.5 million of our outstanding common stock. Subject to market and
operating conditions, we expect to complete the stock repurchase in 2011 using cash generated from operations.
In addition, our revolving
credit facility, which we renewed through June 30, 2011, and expect to renew on similar terms upon
maturity, is available for additional working capital needs or investment opportunities. There can
be no assurance, however, that we will continue to generate cash flows at or above current levels
or that we will be able to maintain our ability to borrow under our revolving credit facility.
Capital Resources
We have a revolving line of credit with a domestic bank with a total availability of $10.0
million. The line is secured by substantially all of our assets, other than intellectual property,
and bears interest at varying rates, ranging from LIBOR plus 1.5% to prime. The line of credit
matures on June 30, 2011, and requires monthly payments of interest only. At December 31, 2010,
there were no borrowings under the line and $4.4 million was available based on the defined
borrowing base, which is calculated based on our eligible accounts receivable and inventory. Our
agreement with the bank requires us to comply with certain financial and other covenants including
maintenance of a minimum tangible net worth and a fixed charge coverage ratio. The ratio of total
liabilities to tangible net worth can be no greater than 1:1, and the fixed coverage charge ratio
can be no less than 1.25:1, based upon a trailing twelve-month period. At December 31, 2010, the
Companys tangible net worth ratio was 0.16:1 and its fixed charge coverage ratio was 2.33:1.
Accordingly, the Company was in compliance with those covenants.
Based on our strong balance sheet and the fact that we had no outstanding debt at December 31,
2010, we believe financing will be available, both through our existing credit line and possible
additional financing. However, there is no assurance that such funding will be available on terms
acceptable to us, or at all. Capital markets in the United States and throughout the world, while
showing signs of recovery, continue to be under stress. Reflecting this situation, many lenders and
capital providers have reduced, and in some cases ceased to provide, debt funding to borrowers. The
resulting lack of available credit could materially and adversely affect our ability to obtain
additional or alternative financing should the need arise for us to access the debt markets.
31
Table of Contents
Contractual Obligations
The following table outlines our future contractual financial obligations by period in which
payment is expected, as of December 31, 2010 (dollars in thousands):
Less than | More than | |||||||||||||||||||
Total | 1 year | 1-3 years | 4-5 years | 5 years | ||||||||||||||||
Non-cancelable operating leases |
$ | 2,935 | $ | 1,224 | $ | 1,711 | $ | | $ | | ||||||||||
Automation equipment |
214 | 112 | 102 | | | |||||||||||||||
Total contractual cash obligations |
$ | 3,149 | $ | 1,336 | $ | 1,813 | $ | | $ | | ||||||||||
We are subject to U.S. federal income tax as well as income taxes imposed by several
states and foreign jurisdictions. As of December 31, 2010, we had $2.3 million of gross
unrecognized tax benefits related to uncertain tax positions. The settlement period for our
long-term income tax liabilities cannot be determined; however, the liabilities are not expected to
become due within the next 12 months.
Off Balance Sheet Arrangements
We had no off balance sheet arrangements as of December 31, 2010.
Critical Accounting Estimates
We have identified the following accounting estimates as critical to our business operations
and the understanding of our results of operations. The preparation of this annual report on Form
10-K requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and
liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of our consolidated
financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period.
While we dont believe that a change in these estimates is reasonably likely, there can be no
assurance that our actual results will not differ from these estimates. The effect of these
policies on our business operations is discussed below.
Standard Product Warranty Reserves
We warrant our law enforcement ECDs from manufacturing defects on a limited basis for a period
of one year after purchase, and thereafter will replace any defective TASER unit for a fee. The
TASER AXON Tactical Computer, Com hub user interface, Synapse Evidence Transfer Manager (ETM),
Headcam, and C2 ECD product is warranted for a period of 90 days after purchase. We track
historical data related to returns and warranty costs on a quarterly basis, and estimate future
warranty claims based upon our historical experience. We have also historically increased our
reserve amount if we become aware of a component failure that could result in larger than
anticipated returns from our customers. As of December 31, 2010, our reserve for warranty returns
was $646,000 compared to a $369,000 reserve at December 31, 2009. Our reserve for warranty returns
has increased in 2010, driven by reserves for new product sales as well as some specifically
identified warranty replacement requirements. In the event that product returns under warranty
differ from our estimates, changes to warranty reserves might become necessary.
Inventory
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market, with cost determined using the weighted
average cost of raw materials, which approximates the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method, and an
allocation of manufacturing labor and overhead costs. The allocation of manufacturing labor and
overhead costs includes management judgments of what constitutes normal capacity of our production
facilities, and a determination of what costs are considered to be abnormal fixed production costs
which are expensed as current-period charges. Provisions are made to reduce potentially excess,
obsolete or slow-moving inventories to their net realizable value. These provisions are based on
our best estimates after considering historical demand, projected future demand, inventory purchase
commitments, industry and market trends and conditions and other factors. Our reserve for excess
and obsolete inventory decreased to $351,000 at December 31, 2010, compared to $474,000 at December
31, 2009. The decrease was driven by the write off of some parts resulting from the introduction of
the cartridge automation equipment. In the event that actual excess, obsolete or slow-moving
inventories differ from these estimates, changes to inventory reserves might become necessary.
32
Table of Contents
Accounts Receivable
Sales are typically made on credit and we generally do not require collateral. We perform
ongoing credit evaluations of our customers financial condition and maintain an allowance for
estimated potential losses. Uncollectible accounts are written off when deemed uncollectible, and
accounts receivable are presented net of an allowance for doubtful accounts. This allowance
represents our best estimate and is based on our judgment after considering a number of factors
including third-party credit reports, actual payment history, customer-specific financial
information and broader market and economic trends and conditions. Our allowance for doubtful
accounts was $200,000 at December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009. In the event that actual
uncollectible amounts differ from these estimates, changes in allowances for doubtful accounts
might become necessary.
Valuation of Long-lived Assets
We review long-lived assets, such as property and equipment and intangible assets subject to
amortization, whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of such
assets may not be recoverable. We utilize a two-step approach to testing long-lived assets for
impairment. The first step tests for possible impairment indicators. If an impairment indicator is
present, the second step measures whether the asset is recoverable based on a comparison of the
carrying amount of the asset to the estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to be
generated by the asset. If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its estimated future cash flows,
an impairment charge is recognized by the amount by which the carrying amount of the asset exceeds
the fair value of the asset. Our review requires the use of judgment and estimates. Future events
or circumstances may result in a charge to earnings if we determine that the carrying value of a
long-lived asset is not recoverable.
Income Taxes
We recognize federal, state and foreign current tax liabilities or assets based on our
estimate of taxes payable or refundable in the current fiscal year by tax jurisdiction. We also
recognize federal, state and foreign deferred tax assets or liabilities, as appropriate, for our
estimate of future tax effects attributable to temporary differences and carryforwards.
We recognize the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is more likely than not
that the tax position will be sustained on examination by the taxing authorities, based on the
technical merits of the position. The tax benefits recognized in the consolidated financial
statements from such a position are measured based on the largest benefit that has a greater than
fifty percent likelihood of being realized upon ultimate resolution. Management must also assess
whether uncertain tax positions as filed could result in the recognition of a liability for
possible interest and penalties if any. We have completed research and development tax credit
studies which identified approximately $5.9 million in tax credits for Federal, Arizona and
California income tax purposes related to the 2003 through 2010 tax years, net of the federal
benefit on the Arizona and California research and development tax credits. Management made the determination that
it was more likely than not that the full benefit of the research and development tax credit would
not be sustained on examination and recorded a liability for unrecognized tax benefits of $2.2
million as of December 31, 2010. Also included as part of the $2.3 million total liability for
unrecognized tax benefits is a management estimate of $106,000 related to uncertain tax positions
for certain state income tax liabilities. As of December 31, 2010, management does not expect the amount of
the unrecognized tax benefit liability to increase or decrease significantly within the next 12
months. Should the unrecognized tax benefit of $2.3 million be recognized, the Companys effective
tax rate would be favorably impacted. Our estimates are based on the information available to
us at the time we prepare the income tax provisions. Our income tax returns are subject to audit by
federal, state, and local governments, generally years after the returns are filed. These returns
could be subject to material adjustments or differing interpretations of the tax laws.
Our calculation of current and deferred tax assets and liabilities is based on certain
estimates and judgments and involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex tax
laws. Our estimates of current and deferred tax assets and liabilities may change based, in part,
on added certainty or finality to an anticipated outcome, changes in accounting or tax laws in the
United States or foreign jurisdictions, or changes in other facts or circumstances. In addition, we recognize liabilities
for potential United States tax contingencies based on our estimate of whether, and the extent to
which, additional taxes may be due. If we determine that payment of these amounts is unnecessary or
if the recorded tax liability is less than our current assessment, we may be required to recognize
an income tax benefit or additional income tax expense in our consolidated financial statements.
33
Table of Contents
In preparing the Companys consolidated financial statements, management assesses the
likelihood that its deferred tax assets will be realized from future taxable income. In evaluating
the Companys ability to recover its deferred income tax assets, management considers all available
positive and negative evidence, including its operating results, ongoing tax planning and forecasts
of future taxable income on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis. A valuation allowance is
established if it is determined that it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the net
deferred tax assets will not be realized. Management exercises significant judgment in determining
its provisions for income taxes, its deferred tax assets and liabilities and its future taxable
income for purposes of assessing its ability to utilize any future tax benefit from its deferred
tax assets.
Although management believes that its tax estimates are reasonable, the ultimate tax
determination involves significant judgment that could become subject to audit by tax authorities
in the ordinary course of business, as well as the generation of sufficient future taxable income.
During 2009, management determined that it was more likely than not that its net operating loss
carryforwards for the state of Arizona, which would have expired in 2009, would be fully realized.
Accordingly, the valuation allowance of $200,000 the Company carried against its deferred tax
assets as of December 31, 2008, was reversed with the benefit recognized during 2009 as a reduction
of the current-year effective tax rate. Management believes that, as of December 31, 2010, based on
an evaluation and projections of future sales and profitability, no other valuation allowance was
deemed necessary. However, such deferred tax assets could be reduced in the future if projections
of future taxable income during the carryforward period are reduced.
Stock-Based Compensation
We estimate the fair value of our stock-based compensation by using the Black-Scholes-Merton
option pricing model which requires the input of highly subjective assumptions. These assumptions
include estimating the length of time employees will retain their stock options before exercising
them (expected term), the estimated volatility of our common stock price over the expected term and
the number of options that will ultimately not vest (forfeitures). We have granted a total of
925,800 performance-based stock options since 2008 the exercise of which is contingent upon the
achievement of certain performance criteria including the successful development and market
acceptance of future product introductions as well as our future operating performance. These
options are vested and compensation expense is recognized based on managements best estimate of
the probability of the performance criteria being satisfied using the most currently available
projections of future product adoption and operating performance, adjusted at each balance sheet
date. Through December 31, 2010 management determined that 331,700 of these options were forfeited.
Of the remaining 594,100 outstanding options, 269,220 options are exercisable and 324,880 are
unvested. Changes in the subjective and probability-based assumptions can materially affect the
estimate of fair value of stock-based compensation and consequently, the related amount recognized
in our statements of operations. Refer to Note 1q to our consolidated financial statements for
further discussion of how we determined our valuation assumptions.
Contingencies
We are subject to the possibility of various loss contingencies including product-related
litigation, arising in the ordinary course of business. We consider the likelihood of loss or
impairment of an asset or the incurrence of a liability, as well as our ability to reasonably
estimate the amount of loss in determining loss contingencies. An estimated loss contingency is
accrued when it is probable that an asset has been impaired or a liability has been incurred and
the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. We regularly evaluate current information available
to us to determine whether such accruals should be adjusted and whether new accruals are required.
Item 7A. | Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
Interest Rate Risk
We invest in a limited number of financial instruments, which at December 31, 2010 consisted
entirely of investments in money market accounts, denominated in United States dollars. At December
31, 2010, we did not hold any investments in fixed-rate interest-earning investments which would be
subject to market value adjustments resulting from fluctuations in interest rates.
Additionally, we have access to a line of credit borrowing facility which bears interest at
varying rates, ranging from LIBOR plus 1.5% to prime. At December 31, 2010, there was no amount
outstanding under the line of credit and the available borrowing under the line of credit was $4.4
million. We have not borrowed any funds under the line of credit since its inception, however;
should we need to do so in the future, such borrowings could be subject to adverse or favorable
changes in the underlying interest rate.
34
Table of Contents
Exchange Rate Risk
Our results of operations and cash flows are subject to fluctuations due to changes in foreign
currency exchange rates, particularly changes in the Euro related to transactions performed by
TASER Europe. To date, we have not engaged in any currency hedging activities, although we may do
so in the future. Fluctuations in currency exchange rates could harm our business in the future.
The majority of our sales to international customers are transacted in United States dollars
and therefore, are not subject to exchange rate fluctuations. However, the cost to our customers
increases when the U.S. dollar strengthens against their local currency. In this difficult economy
this risk of loss becomes a potential credit-risk for non-payment.
35
Table of Contents
Item 8. | Financial Statements and Supplementary Data |
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
December 31,
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
December 31,
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Assets |
||||||||
Current assets: |
||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 42,684,241 | $ | 45,505,049 | ||||
Accounts receivable, net of allowance of $200,000 in 2010 and 2009, respectively |
13,542,535 | 15,384,993 | ||||||
Inventory |
17,815,405 | 15,085,750 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other assets |
1,999,525 | 1,461,539 | ||||||
Deferred income tax assets, net |
6,284,489 | 8,447,915 | ||||||
Total current assets |
82,326,195 | 85,885,246 | ||||||
Property and equipment, net |
35,905,765 | 38,673,065 | ||||||
Deferred income tax assets, net |
13,919,753 | 10,997,093 | ||||||
Intangible assets |
3,090,876 | 2,765,701 | ||||||
Other long-term assets |
944,346 | 104,812 | ||||||
Total assets |
$ | 136,186,935 | $ | 138,425,917 | ||||
Liabilities and stockholders equity |
||||||||
Current liabilities: |
||||||||
Accounts payable |
$ | 4,550,789 | $ | 6,357,195 | ||||
Accrued liabilities |
3,759,800 | 4,252,577 | ||||||
Current portion of deferred revenue |
3,265,260 | 2,819,155 | ||||||
Customer deposits |
372,145 | 355,926 | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
11,947,994 | 13,784,853 | ||||||
Deferred revenue, net of current portion |
4,392,860 | 4,675,089 | ||||||
Liability for unrecognized tax benefits |
2,281,840 | 2,264,779 | ||||||
Total liabilities |
18,622,694 | 20,724,721 | ||||||
Commitments and contingencies |
||||||||
Stockholders equity |
||||||||
Preferred stock, $0.00001 par value per share; 25 million shares authorized; no
shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2010 and 2009 |
| | ||||||
Common stock, $0.00001 par value per share; 200 million shares authorized;
62,621,268 and 62,119,063 shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2010
and 2009, respectively |
647 | 642 | ||||||
Additional paid-in capital |
97,122,085 | 92,839,165 | ||||||
Treasury stock, 2,091,600 shares at December 31, 2010 and 2009 |
(14,708,237 | ) | (14,708,237 | ) | ||||
Retained earnings |
35,185,191 | 39,569,626 | ||||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
(35,445 | ) | | |||||
Total stockholders equity |
117,564,241 | 117,701,196 | ||||||
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
$ | 136,186,935 | $ | 138,425,917 | ||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
36
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For The Years Ended December 31,
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
For The Years Ended December 31,
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Net sales |
$ | 86,930,019 | $ | 104,251,560 | $ | 92,845,490 | ||||||
Cost of products sold |
41,563,144 | 40,849,151 | 35,841,263 | |||||||||
Gross margin |
45,366,875 | 63,402,409 | 57,004,227 | |||||||||
Sales, general and administrative expenses |
39,094,625 | 43,479,232 | 38,860,729 | |||||||||
Research and development expenses |
11,411,889 | 20,002,351 | 12,918,161 | |||||||||
Income (loss) from operations |
(5,139,639 | ) | (79,174 | ) | 5,225,337 | |||||||
Interest and other income, net |
25,819 | 170,547 | 1,717,967 | |||||||||
Income (loss) before provision for income taxes |
(5,113,820 | ) | 91,373 | 6,943,304 | ||||||||
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
(729,385 | ) | 92,479 | 3,306,263 | ||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | (4,384,435 | ) | $ | (1,106 | ) | $ | 3,637,041 | ||||
Income (loss) per common and common equivalent shares |
||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.00 | ) | $ | 0.06 | ||||
Diluted |
$ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.00 | ) | $ | 0.06 | ||||
Weighted average number of common and common equivalent shares outstanding |
||||||||||||
Basic |
62,524,446 | 61,920,094 | 62,371,004 | |||||||||
Diluted |
62,524,446 | 61,920,094 | 64,070,869 |
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
37
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
Accumulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional | Other | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common Stock | Paid-in | Treasury Stock | Comprehensive | Retained | Stockholders | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Shares | Amount | Capital | Shares | Amount | Loss | Earnings | Equity | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2007 |
63,263,903 | $ | 635 | $ | 86,911,381 | 300,000 | $ | (2,208,957 | ) | $ | | $ | 35,933,691 | $ | 120,636,750 | |||||||||||||||||
Exercise of stock options |
323,409 | 3 | 342,818 | | | | | 342,821 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Deferred tax asset correction (see Note 9) |
| | (2,014,955 | ) | | | | | (2,014,955 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation expense |
| | 2,423,885 | | | | | 2,423,885 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Purchase of treasury stock |
(1,791,600 | ) | | | 1,791,600 | (12,499,280 | ) | | | (12,499,280 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net income |
| | | | | | 3,637,041 | 3,637,041 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2008 |
61,795,712 | 638 | 87,663,129 | 2,091,600 | (14,708,237 | ) | | 39,570,732 | 112,526,262 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Exercise of stock options |
323,351 | 4 | 155,540 | | | | | 155,544 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation expense |
| | 4,988,837 | | | | | 4,988,837 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tax benefit from stock options exercised |
| | 31,659 | | | | | 31,659 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net loss |
| | | | | | (1,106 | ) | (1,106 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2009 |
62,119,063 | 642 | 92,839,165 | 2,091,600 | (14,708,237 | ) | | 39,569,626 | 117,701,196 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Exercise of stock options |
502,205 | 5 | 1,001,471 | | | | | 1,001,476 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock-based compensation expense |
| | 3,682,675 | | | | | 3,682,675 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tax benefit from stock options exercised |
| | 52,147 | | | | | 52,147 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reversal of tax benefit from stock options forfeited |
| | (329,143 | ) | | | | | (329,143 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock option buyback |
| | (124,230 | ) | | | | | (124,230 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Net loss |
| | | | | | (4,384,435 | ) | (4,384,435 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation adjustments |
| | | | | (35,445 | ) | | (35,445 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, December 31, 2010 |
62,621,268 | $ | 647 | $ | 97,122,085 | 2,091,600 | $ | (14,708,237 | ) | $ | (35,445 | ) | $ | 35,185,191 | $ | 117,564,241 | ||||||||||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
38
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31,
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
For the Years Ended December 31,
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Cash Flows from Operating Activities: |
||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | (4,384,435 | ) | $ | (1,106 | ) | $ | 3,637,041 | ||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities: |
||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
7,286,915 | 3,634,412 | 2,637,773 | |||||||||
Loss on disposal of assets |
121,008 | 66,829 | 171,098 | |||||||||
Provision for doubtful accounts |
48,903 | 82,251 | 78,010 | |||||||||
Provision for excess and obsolete inventory |
1,278,284 | 821,983 | 640,655 | |||||||||
Provision for warranty |
843,268 | 92,278 | 368,521 | |||||||||
Stock-based compensation expense |
3,682,675 | 4,988,837 | 2,423,885 | |||||||||
Deferred insurance settlement proceeds |
| | (404,848 | ) | ||||||||
Deferred income taxes |
(1,088,377 | ) | (1,188,157 | ) | 2,060,623 | |||||||
Provision for unrecognized tax benefits |
17,061 | 572,699 | 592,007 | |||||||||
Tax benefit from stock-based compensation |
(52,147 | ) | (31,659 | ) | | |||||||
Change in assets and liabilities: |
||||||||||||
Accounts receivable |
1,768,134 | 1,326,309 | (5,180,010 | ) | ||||||||
Inventory |
(4,007,939 | ) | (2,440,616 | ) | (600,968 | ) | ||||||
Prepaids and other assets |
(1,715,403 | ) | 976,156 | 1,856,355 | ||||||||
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
(3,246,517 | ) | 1,031,196 | (2,323,792 | ) | |||||||
Deferred revenue |
163,876 | 142,634 | 2,115,699 | |||||||||
Customer deposits |
16,219 | 43,240 | 45,958 | |||||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
731,525 | 10,117,286 | 8,118,007 | |||||||||
Cash Flows from Investing Activities: |
||||||||||||
Purchases of investments |
| | (43,887,640 | ) | ||||||||
Proceeds from investments |
| 2,500,000 | 58,895,113 | |||||||||
Proceeds from disposal of fixed assets |
30,972 | | | |||||||||
Purchases of property and equipment |
(4,023,691 | ) | (13,708,177 | ) | (6,144,425 | ) | ||||||
Purchases of intangible assets |
(478,983 | ) | (471,698 | ) | (745,622 | ) | ||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities |
(4,471,702 | ) | (11,679,875 | ) | 8,117,426 | |||||||
Cash Flows from Financing Activities: |
||||||||||||
Repurchase of common stock |
| | (12,499,280 | ) | ||||||||
Repurchase of stock options |
(124,230 | ) | | | ||||||||
Proceeds from options exercised |
1,001,476 | 155,544 | 342,821 | |||||||||
Excess tax benefit from stock-based compensation |
52,147 | 31,659 | | |||||||||
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
929,393 | 187,203 | (12,156,459 | ) | ||||||||
Effect of exchange rate change on cash and cash equivalents |
(10,024 | ) | | | ||||||||
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents |
(2,810,784 | ) | (1,375,386 | ) | 4,078,974 | |||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period |
45,505,049 | 46,880,435 | 42,801,461 | |||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents, end of period |
$ | 42,684,241 | $ | 45,505,049 | $ | 46,880,435 | ||||||
Supplemental Disclosure: |
||||||||||||
Cash paid for income taxes net |
$ | 703,982 | $ | 894,563 | $ | 523,950 | ||||||
Non Cash Transactions- |
||||||||||||
Property and equipment purchases in accounts payable |
$ | 156,213 | $ | 1,385,089 | $ | | ||||||
Reversal of tax benefit from stock options forfeited |
$ | 329,143 | $ | | $ | | ||||||
Deferred tax asset correction (see Note 8) |
$ | | $ | | $ | 2,014,955 |
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
39
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
TASER International, Inc. (TASER or the Company) is a developer and manufacturer of
advanced electronic control devices (ECDs) designed for use in law enforcement, military,
corrections, private security and personal defense. In addition, the Company has developed full
technology solutions for the capture, storage and management of video/audio evidence as well as
other tactical capabilities for use in law enforcement. The Company sells its products worldwide
through its direct sales force, distribution partners, online store and third-party resellers. The
Company was incorporated in Arizona in September 1993, and reincorporated in Delaware in January
2001. The Companys corporate headquarters and manufacturing facilities are located in Scottsdale,
Arizona. The Companys internet services and software development division facilities are located
in Carpenteria, California.
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, and
its wholly owned subsidiary, TASER International Europe SE (TASER Europe). TASER Europe was
established in 2009 to facilitate sales and provide customer service to our customers in the
European region. All material intercompany accounts, transactions, and profits have been
eliminated.
a. Basis of Presentation and Use of Estimates
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (US GAAP). The
preparation of these consolidated financial statements requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent
assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported
amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Significant estimates in these
consolidated financial statements include allowances for doubtful accounts receivable, inventory
valuation reserves, product warranty reserves, valuation of long lived assets, deferred income
taxes, stock-based compensation and contingencies. Actual results could differ from those
estimates.
b. Cash, Cash Equivalents and Investments
Cash and cash equivalents include cash and money market funds. At December 31, 2010, and 2009,
the entire $42.7 million and $45.5 million, respectively, of the Companys cash and cash
equivalents were comprised of cash and money market funds. The Companys cash and investment
accounts earned interest at an approximate rate of 0.10% during 2010, down from 0.30% in 2009. The
Companys cash balances include a deposit account with a balance of $12.2 million, which exceeds
federally insured limits, and money market funds of approximately $30.4 million, which are not
insured by the FDIC.
c. Inventory
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost is determined using the weighted
average cost of raw materials which approximates the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method and includes
allocations of manufacturing labor and overhead. Provisions are made to reduce potentially excess,
obsolete or slow-moving inventories to their net realizable value. These provisions are based on
managements best estimate after considering historical demand, projected future demand, inventory
purchase commitments, industry and market trends and conditions and other factors. Management
evaluates inventory costs for abnormal costs due to excess production capacity and treats such
costs as period costs.
d. Property and Equipment
Property and equipment are stated at cost net of accumulated depreciation. Additions and
improvements are capitalized while ordinary maintenance and repair expenditures are charged to
expense as incurred. Depreciation is calculated using the straight-line method over the estimated
useful lives of the assets.
40
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
e. Capitalized Software Development Costs
For development costs related to EVIDENCE.COM, the Companys Software as a Service (SaaS)
product, the Company capitalized qualifying computer software costs that were incurred during the
application development stage. Costs related to preliminary project planning activities and
post-implementation activities were expensed as incurred. At December 31, 2010 and 2009,
capitalized software development costs were approximately $3.7 million and $2.4 million,
respectively. Amortization of capitalized software development costs commenced during the third
quarter of 2010 and was $612,000 for the year ended December 31, 2010.
For development costs related to the TASER Protector Platform, the Company capitalized a
portion of the development costs paid to RouteCloud LLC for development of the Protector Platform
technology under the terms of the joint venture agreement. At December 31, 2010 and 2009,
capitalized software development costs were approximately $0.8 million and $0, respectively. The
Company will begin amortizing capitalized development costs once the first product has launched,
which is expected to occur in the first quarter of 2011.
f. Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
Management evaluates whether events and circumstances have occurred that indicate the
remaining estimated useful life of long-lived assets and identifiable intangible assets may warrant
revision or that the remaining balance of these assets may not be recoverable. In performing the
review for recoverability, management estimates the future undiscounted cash flows expected to
result from the use of the assets and their eventual disposition. The amount of the impairment
loss, if impairment exists, would be calculated based on the excess of the carrying amounts of the
assets over their estimated fair value computed using discounted cash flows. No impairment losses
were recorded in 2010, 2009 or 2008.
g. Customer Deposits
The Company requires certain deposits in advance of shipment for certain customer sales
orders. Customer deposits are recorded as a current liability on the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets.
h. Revenue Recognition and Accounts Receivable
The Company recognizes revenues when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery
has occurred or services have been rendered, title has transferred, the price is fixed and
collectability is reasonably assured. Revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables are divided
into separate units and revenue is allocated using estimated selling prices if there is no
vendor-specific objective evidence or third-party evidence of the selling prices of the
deliverables.
In most instances, sales of the Companys products are final and its customers do not have a
right to return the product. The Companys consumer product, the TASER C2, has a 30 day right of
return for inactivated units purchased direct from the Company. The historical product return rate
is used to determine the return reserve.
During 2008, the Company began selling the TASER C2 product through certain retailers who do
not assume title, risk of loss to the inventory or credit risk. The Company, therefore, recognizes
revenue from such retailers on a sell-through method using information provided by the retailer.
The revenue and related costs are deferred until the product has been sold by the retailer.
During 2010, the Company began selling EVIDENCE.COM, the Companys SaaS product. Customers are
able to purchase these services in advance, for a 1 year, 3 year, or 5 year service term. Revenue
for EVIDENCE.COM service is deferred at the time of the sale and recognized over the service
period. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, $0.1 million and $0 was deferred for EVIDENCE.COM services
paid in advance.
The Company offers customers the right to purchase extended warranties that include additional
services and coverage beyond the limited warranty on the TASER X26, ADVANCED TASER, X3, AXON, and
C2 products. Revenue for extended warranty purchases is deferred at the time of sale and recognized
over the warranty period commencing on the date of sale. The extended warranties range from one to
four years. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, $7.5 million and $7.5 million was deferred under this
program, respectively. The current portion of deferred revenue represents the extended warranty
revenue which will be recognized in 2011. Also included in deferred revenue at December 31, 2010 is
$0.1 million of deferrals related to trade-in credits offered to upgrade from the ADVANCED TASER to
the X26 and X3.
41
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Sales are typically made on credit and the Company generally does not require collateral.
Management performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers financial condition and maintains
an allowance for estimated potential losses. Uncollectible accounts are written off when deemed
uncollectible, and accounts receivable are presented net of an allowance for doubtful accounts.
This allowance represents our best estimate and is based on our judgment after considering a number
of factors, including third-party credit reports, actual payment history, cash discounts,
customer-specific financial information and broader market and economic trends and conditions.
Included as a component of revenue is development funding, provided by the Joint Non-Lethal
Weapons Directorate (JNLWD) of the U.S Department of Defense under a cost-plus fixed fee contract.
Periodically, an invoice summarizing the reimbursable expenses is submitted to JNLWD for payment.
The payment request submitted by the Company to the JNLWD details the costs incurred in the period
plus a nominal contracted profit margin. The total amount of revenue recognized for this work in
the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was $0.4 million, $1.3 million and $0.9 million
respectively.
Certain of the Companys customers are charged shipping fees, which are recorded as a
component of net sales. Sales tax collected on sales is netted against government remittances and
thus, recorded on a net basis. Training revenue is recorded as the service is provided.
i. Cost of Products Sold
Cost of products sold represents manufacturing costs, consisting of materials, labor and
overhead related to finished goods and components. Shipping costs incurred related to product
delivery are also included in cost of products sold. Cost of products sold also includes data
center operating and software maintenance costs associated with operation of EVIDENCE.COM.
j. Advertising Costs
The Company expenses advertising costs in the period in which they are incurred, with the
exception of commercial advertising production costs which are expensed at the time the first
commercial is shown on television. The Company incurred advertising costs of $0.7 million, $0.7
million, and $2.1 million in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, the
Company had $25,000 and $79,000, respectively, of prepaid advertising costs. Advertising costs are
included in sales, general and administrative expenses in the accompanying statements of
operations.
k. Warranty Costs
The Company warrants its X3 ECDs, X26 ECDs, M26 ECDs, TASER Cam, and Shockwave products from
manufacturing defects on a limited basis for a period of one year after purchase, and thereafter
will replace any defective unit for a fee. The TASER AXON Tactical Computer, Com hub user
interface, Synapse Evidence Transfer Manager (ETM), Headcam, and C2 ECD product is warranted for a
period of 90 days after purchase. The Company also sells extended warranties for periods of up to
four years after the expiration of the limited one year warranty. After the one year standard
warranty expires, if the device fails to operate properly for any reason, the Company will replace
the TASER X26 for a prorated discounted price depending on when the product was placed into
service. These fees are intended to cover the handling and repair costs and include a profit.
Management tracks historical data related to returns and warranty costs on a quarterly basis, and
estimates future warranty claims by applying the estimated weighted average return rate to the
product sales for the period. If management becomes aware of a component failure that could result
in larger than anticipated returns from its customers, the reserve would be increased. The reserve
for warranty returns increased in 2010, driven by reserves for new product sales as well as some
specifically identified warranty replacement requirements. The reserve decreased in 2009 as a
result of improved product returns experience, particularly for the X26 product, as the result of
continuing improvements made in the manufacturing and quality processes. The following table
summarizes the changes in the estimated product warranty liabilities for the years ended December
31, 2010, 2009 and 2008:
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Balance at Beginning of Period |
$ | 369,311 | $ | 615,031 | $ | 919,254 | ||||||
Utilization of Accrual |
(566,466 | ) | (337,998 | ) | (672,744 | ) | ||||||
Warranty Expense |
843,268 | 92,278 | 368,521 | |||||||||
Balance at End of the Period |
$ | 646,113 | $ | 369,311 | $ | 615,031 | ||||||
42
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
l. Research and Development Expenses
The Company expenses research and development costs as incurred. The Company incurred product
development expense of approximately $11.4 million, $20.0 million, and $12.9 million in 2010, 2009
and 2008, respectively.
m. Income Taxes
Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and
liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the
financial statement amounts of assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating
loss and tax credit carry forwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted
tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in future years in which those temporary differences
are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a
change in tax rate is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. Deferred
tax assets are reduced through the establishment of a valuation allowance at the time, based upon
available evidence, if it becomes more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will not be
realized.
The Company recognizes the tax benefit from an uncertain tax position only if it is more
likely than not that the tax position will be sustained on examination by the taxing authorities,
based on the technical merits of the position. The tax benefits recognized in the consolidated
financial statements from such a position are measured based on the largest benefit that has a
greater than 50% likelihood of being realized upon ultimate resolution. Management also assesses
whether uncertain tax positions as filed could result in the recognition of a liability for
possible interest and penalties. The Companys policy is to include interest and penalties related
to unrecognized tax benefits as a component of income tax expense. Refer to Note 8 for additional
information regarding the change in unrecognized tax benefits.
n. Concentration of Credit Risk and Major Customers / Suppliers
Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk
consist of accounts receivable. Sales are typically made on credit and the Company generally does
not require collateral. Management performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers financial
condition and maintains an allowance for estimated losses. Uncollectible accounts are written off
when deemed uncollectible, and accounts receivable are presented net of an allowance for doubtful
accounts which totaled $200,000 as of December 31, 2010 and 2009. Historically, the Company has
experienced a low level of write offs related to doubtful accounts.
The Company sells its products primarily through a network of unaffiliated distributors. The
Company also reserves the right to sell directly to the end user to secure the customers account.
In 2010, no single customer exceeded 10% of total sales. In 2009, one distributor represented
approximately 12% of total sales. No other customer exceeded 10% of total sales in 2009. In 2008,
one distributor represented approximately 11% of total sales. No other customer exceeded 10% of
total sales in 2008.
At December 31, 2010, the Company had accounts receivable from three customers comprising 19%,
11%, and 10% of the aggregate accounts receivable balance. At December 31, 2009, the Company had
accounts receivable from one customer comprising 13% of the aggregate accounts receivable balance.
These customers are unaffiliated distributors of the Companys products.
The Company currently purchases finished circuit boards and injection-molded plastic
components from suppliers located in the United States. Although the Company currently obtains many
of these components from single source suppliers, the Company owns the injection molded component
tooling used in their production. As a result, management believes it could obtain alternative
suppliers in most cases without incurring significant production delays. The Company also purchases
small, machined parts from a vendor in Taiwan, custom cartridge assemblies from a proprietary
vendor in the United States, and electronic components from a variety of foreign and domestic
distributors. Management believes that there are readily available alternative suppliers in most
cases who can consistently meet its needs for these components. The Company acquires most of its
components on a purchase order basis and does not have long-term contracts with suppliers.
43
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
o. Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The Company uses the fair value framework for measuring financial assets and liabilities
measured on a recurring basis and for non-financial assets and liabilities when these items are
remeasured,
Fair value is defined as the price that would be received from the sale of an asset or paid to
transfer a liability (an exit price) on the measurement date in an orderly transaction between
market participants in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability. The
fair value framework specifies a hierarchy of valuation techniques, which is based on whether the
inputs into the valuation technique are observable or unobservable. The hierarchy is as follows:
| Level 1 Valuation techniques in which all significant
inputs are unadjusted quoted prices from active markets
for assets or liabilities that are identical to the
assets or liabilities being measured. |
||
| Level 2 Valuation techniques in which significant
inputs include quoted prices from active markets for
assets or liabilities that are similar to the assets or
liabilities being measured and/or quoted prices for
assets or liabilities that are identical or similar to
the assets or liabilities being measured from markets
that are not active. Also, model-derived valuations in
which all significant inputs and significant value
drivers are observable in active markets are Level 2
valuation techniques. |
||
| Level 3 Valuation techniques in which one or more
significant inputs or significant value drivers are
unobservable. Unobservable inputs are valuation technique
inputs that reflect our own assumptions about the
assumptions that market participants would use in pricing
an asset or liability. |
Following is a description of the valuation techniques that the Company uses to measure the
fair value of assets and liabilities that it measures and reports on its balance sheet at fair
value on a recurring basis:
| Cash Equivalents. As of December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Companys cash
equivalents consisted of money market mutual funds. The Company valued
its cash equivalents using observable inputs that reflect quoted
prices for securities with identical characteristics, and accordingly,
the Company classified the valuation techniques that use these inputs
as Level 1. |
The Companys financial instruments also include accounts receivable, accounts payable and
accrued liabilities. Due to the short-term nature of these instruments, their fair value
approximates their carrying value on the balance sheet as of December 31, 2010 and 2009.
p. Segment Information
Management has determined that its operations are comprised of one reportable segment the
sale of ECDs, accessories and other products and services. However, based on the introduction of
new product offerings in 2010, management is presently in the process of evaluating how the
operating results of the Company will be reviewed internally on a go-forward basis in order to
improve the level of resource decision-making and assessment of segment performance. Based on this
evaluation, management will make the necessary changes to its internal management reporting system
and subsequently, will perform a review to determine if the Company will redefine its reportable
operating segments in accordance with U.S. GAAP. For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008, sales by geographic area were as follows:
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Sales by Geographic Area |
||||||||||||
United States |
79 | % | 78 | % | 82 | % | ||||||
Other Countries |
21 | % | 22 | % | 18 | % | ||||||
Total |
100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | ||||||
Sales to customers outside of the United States are denominated in U.S. dollars and
are attributed to each country based on the billing address of the distributor or customer. To
date, no individual country outside the U.S. has represented
a material amount of total net revenue. Substantially all assets of the Company are located in the
United States.
44
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
q. Stock-Based Compensation
The Company calculates the fair value of stock-based awards using the Black-Scholes-Merton
option pricing valuation model, which incorporates various assumptions including volatility,
expected life, and interest rates. The assumptions used for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009
and 2008 and the resulting estimates of weighted-average fair value per share of options granted
during those periods, excluding the effects of the exchange program, are as follows:
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Weighted average / range of volatility |
61 | % | 70 | % | 70 | % | ||||||
Risk-free interest rate |
2.0 | % | 1.9 | % | 2.2 | % | ||||||
Dividend rate |
0.0 | % | 0.0 | % | 0.0 | % | ||||||
Expected life of options |
4.5 years | 4.5 years | 4.0 years | |||||||||
Weighted average fair value of options granted |
$ | 2.59 | $ | 2.56 | $ | 2.89 |
The expected life of the options represents the estimated period of time until
exercise and is based on historical experience of similar awards, giving consideration to the
contractual terms, vesting schedules and expectations of future employee behavior. Expected stock
price volatility is based on a combination of historical volatility of the Companys stock and the
one-year implied volatility of its publicly traded options for the related vesting periods. The
risk-free interest rate is based on the implied yield available on U.S. Treasury zero-coupon issues
with an equivalent remaining term. The Company has not paid dividends in the past and does not plan
to pay any dividends in the near future. The estimated fair value of stock-based compensation
awards and other options is amortized to expense on a straight line basis over the relevant vesting
period. As share-based compensation expense recognized is based on awards ultimately expected to
vest, it is reduced for estimated forfeitures. Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and
revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. The
Company forfeiture rate was calculated based on its historical experience of awards which
ultimately vested. See Note 10 for further discussion of the Companys stock-based compensation.
r. Income (Loss) Per Common Share
Basic income per share is computed by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average
number of common shares outstanding during the periods presented. Diluted income per share reflects
the potential dilution that could occur if outstanding stock options were exercised utilizing the
treasury stock method. The calculation of the weighted average number of shares outstanding and
earnings per share are as follows:
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Numerator for basic and diluted earnings per share |
||||||||||||
Net (loss) income |
$ | (4,384,435 | ) | $ | (1,106 | ) | $ | 3,637,041 | ||||
Denominator for basic earnings per share weighted average shares outstanding |
62,524,446 | 61,920,094 | 62,371,004 | |||||||||
Dilutive effect of shares issuable under stock options outstanding |
| | 1,699,865 | |||||||||
Denominator for diluted earnings per share adjusted weighted average shares outstanding |
62,524,446 | 61,920,094 | 64,070,869 | |||||||||
Net (loss) income per common share |
||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.00 | ) | $ | 0.06 | ||||
Diluted |
$ | (0.07 | ) | $ | (0.00 | ) | $ | 0.06 |
45
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Basic income (loss) per share is based upon the weighted average number of common shares
outstanding during the period. Diluted income per share includes the dilutive effect of potential
stock option exercises, calculated using the treasury stock method. As a result of the net loss for
the year ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, 5,075,621 and 8,056,927 shares of potential dilutive
securities were considered anti-dilutive and excluded from the calculation as their effect would
have been to reduce the net loss per share. For the year ended December 31, 2008, the effects of
2,205,861 were excluded from the calculation of diluted income per share as their effect would have
been anti-dilutive and increased the net income per share.
s. Recently Adopted Accounting Guidance
In June 2009, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on the consolidation of variable interest
entities, which was effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2010. The new guidance requires
revised evaluations of whether entities represent variable interest entities, ongoing assessments
of control over such entities, and additional disclosures for variable interests. The adoption of
this new guidance did not have a material impact on the Companys consolidated financial
statements.
In October 2009, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on revenue recognition that will
become effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2011, with earlier adoption permitted. Under
the new guidance on arrangements that include software elements, tangible products that have
software components that are essential to the functionality of the tangible product will no longer
be within the scope of the software revenue recognition guidance, and software-enabled products
will now be subject to other relevant revenue recognition guidance. Additionally, the FASB issued
authoritative guidance on revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables that are outside the
scope of the software revenue recognition guidance. Under the new guidance, when vendor specific
objective evidence or third party evidence for deliverables in an arrangement cannot be determined,
a best estimate of the selling price is required to separate deliverables and allocate arrangement
consideration using the relative selling price method. The new guidance includes new disclosure
requirements on how the application of the relative selling price method affects the timing and
amount of revenue recognition. Management is evaluating the impact that adoption of this new
guidance will have on the Companys consolidated financial statements.
Recent Accounting Guidance Not Yet Adopted
In December 2010, the FASB issued authoritative guidance on business combinations concerning
the disclosure of supplementary pro forma information which will be effective for the Company
prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after January 1,
2011. The new guidance clarifies the acquisition date that should be used for reporting the pro
forma financial information disclosures when comparative financial statements are presented. The
amendments also improve the usefulness of the pro forma revenue and earnings disclosures by
requiring a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments
that are directly attributable to the business combination. Management does not expect adoption of
this new guidance to have a material impact on the Companys consolidated financial statements.
t. Foreign Currency Translation
The Companys foreign subsidiary uses the local currency as the functional currency. Assets
and liabilities are translated at exchange rates in effect at the balance sheet date. Income and
expense accounts are translated at the average monthly exchange rates during the year. Resulting
translation adjustments are recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income
(loss) on the consolidated balance sheets.
46
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
2. Inventory
Inventories consisted of the following at December 31:
December 31, 2010 | December 31, 2009 | |||||||
Raw materials and work-in-process |
$ | 11,817,579 | $ | 10,387,229 | ||||
Finished goods |
6,348,490 | 5,172,595 | ||||||
Reserve for excess and obsolete inventory |
(350,664 | ) | (474,074 | ) | ||||
Total Inventory |
$ | 17,815,405 | $ | 15,085,750 | ||||
3. Property and Equipment
Property and equipment consisted of the following at December 31:
Estimated | ||||||||||||
Useful Life | 2010 | 2009 | ||||||||||
Land |
$ | 2,899,962 | $ | 2,899,962 | ||||||||
Building |
39 Years | 14,126,110 | 14,115,446 | |||||||||
Production equipment |
3-7 Years | 18,579,556 | 18,353,467 | |||||||||
Telephone equipment |
5 Years | 9,283 | 9,283 | |||||||||
Computer equipment |
3-5 Years | 8,143,098 | 9,148,440 | |||||||||
Furniture and office equipment |
5-7 Years | 3,001,496 | 3,035,410 | |||||||||
Vehicles |
5 Years | 503,872 | 503,872 | |||||||||
Website development costs |
3 Years | 846,387 | 807,006 | |||||||||
Capitalized software development costs |
3 Years | 3,670,122 | 2,349,724 | |||||||||
Construction in process |
n/a | 2,082,403 | 40,358 | |||||||||
Total Cost |
53,862,290 | 51,262,968 | ||||||||||
Less: Accumulated depreciation |
(17,956,525 | ) | (12,589,903 | ) | ||||||||
Net Property and Equipment |
$ | 35,905,765 | $ | 38,673,065 | ||||||||
Construction in process includes new product production equipment which was not in
service at December 31, 2010. Depreciation and amortization expense relative to property and
equipment for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was $6.8 million, $3.5 million, and
$2.6 million, respectively. In 2010, the Company wrote off or disposed of a total of $1.6 million
of computer, production and office equipment which were no longer in service, These assets had
accumulated depreciation of $1.5 million and generated a loss on disposal of $0.1 million for the
equipment that was sold.
4. Other Long-Term Assets
Included in other long-term assets is approximately $1.1 million of AXON and training
equipment used on a recurring basis for trial, evaluation and training purposes. The Company is
amortizing this equipment over an estimated useful life of two years due to the high levels of
turnover and usage of these assets. Amortization expense for the years ended December 31, 2010,
2009 and 2008 was $0.3 million, $0 and $0, respectively and accumulated amortization was $0.3
million and $0 at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
47
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
5. Intangible Assets
Intangible assets consisted of the following at December 31:
2010 | 2009 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross | Gross | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Carrying | Accumulated | Net Carrying | Carrying | Accumulated | Net Carrying | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Useful Life | Amount | Amortization | Amount | Amount | Amortization | Amount | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Amortized intangible assets |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Domain names |
5 Years | $ | 237,911 | $ | 66,006 | $ | 171,905 | $ | 230,991 | $ | 60,000 | $ | 170,991 | |||||||||||||||
Issued patents |
4 to 15 Years | 1,040,148 | 264,716 | 775,432 | 869,309 | 206,907 | 662,402 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Issued trademarks |
9 to 11 Years | 207,721 | 37,659 | 170,062 | 131,058 | 19,183 | 111,875 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Non compete agreement |
5 to 7 Years | 150,000 | 130,000 | 20,000 | 150,000 | 106,429 | 43,571 | |||||||||||||||||||||
1,635,780 | 498,381 | 1,137,399 | 1,381,358 | 392,519 | 988,839 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Unamortized intangible assets |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
TASER Trademark |
900,000 | 900,000 | 900,000 | 900,000 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Patents and trademarks pending |
1,053,477 | 1,053,477 | 876,862 | 876,862 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
1,953,477 | 1,953,477 | 1,776,862 | 1,776,862 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total intangible assets |
$ | 3,589,257 | $ | 498,381 | $ | 3,090,876 | $ | 3,158,220 | $ | 392,519 | $ | 2,765,701 | ||||||||||||||||
Amortization expense for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was
$106,000, $88,000, and $80,000, respectively. Estimated amortization for intangible assets with
definite lives for the next five years ended December 31, and thereafter is as follows:
2011 |
$ | 153,568 | ||
2012 |
133,767 | |||
2013 |
133,769 | |||
2014 |
104,772 | |||
2015 |
96,020 | |||
Thereafter |
515,503 | |||
$ | 1,137,399 | |||
6. Accrued Liabilities
Accrued liabilities were comprised as follows at December 31:
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Accrued salaries and benefits |
$ | 1,411,716 | $ | 1,691,303 | ||||
Accrued expenses |
1,668,477 | 2,191,963 | ||||||
Accrued warranty expense |
646,113 | 369,311 | ||||||
Accrued income tax |
33,494 | | ||||||
Total |
$ | 3,759,800 | $ | 4,252,577 | ||||
48
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
7. Commitments and Contingencies
a. Lease Obligations
The Company has entered into operating leases for various office space, storage facilities and
equipment. Rent expense under all operating leases, including both cancelable and non-cancelable
leases, was $1,618,358, $1,040,312, and $223,000 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009, and
2008, respectively. Future minimum lease payments under non-cancelable operating leases having
remaining terms in excess of one year as of December 31, 2010, are as follows:
Year ending December 31, | ||||
2011 |
$ | 1,224,260 | ||
2012 |
859,234 | |||
2013 |
588,784 | |||
2014 |
263,190 | |||
2015 |
| |||
Thereafter |
| |||
Total |
$ | 2,935,468 | ||
b. Purchase Commitments
On October 25, 2010, the Company entered into a contract with Automation Tooling Systems, Inc
for the cartridge assembly line consignment parts. ATS will charge a fee of $9,300 per month for 25
months, which is a fee for access to the consignment inventory of spare parts located on the
Companys premises.
c. Litigation
Product Litigation
The Company is currently named as a defendant in 51 lawsuits in which the
plaintiffs allege either wrongful death or personal injury in situations in which the TASER device
was used (or present) by law enforcement officers in connection with arrests or during training
exercises. Companion cases arising from the same incident have been combined into one for reporting
purposes.
In addition, 123 other lawsuits have been dismissed or judgment entered in favor of the
Company which are not included in this number. An appeal was filed by the plaintiff in the Lee
(TN), Thompson (MI), Marquez (AZ) and Rosa (CA) cases where judgment was entered in favor of the
Company. These cases are not included in this number or in the table below.
Also not included in the number of pending lawsuits or in the table below is the Heston
lawsuit in which a jury verdict was entered against the Company on June 6, 2008, and judgment was
entered against the Company on January 30, 2009 in the amount of $153,150 as compensatory damages,
$1,423,127 as attorney fees, and $182,000 as costs. These damages, fees and costs are covered by
the Companys insurance policies. The jury found that Mr. Hestons own actions were 85% responsible
for his death. The jury assigned 15% of the responsibility to TASER for a negligent failure to
warn that extended or multiple TASER ECD applications could cause muscle contractions that could
potentially contribute to acidosis to a degree that could cause cardiac arrest. The jury
inappropriately awarded $5,200,000 in punitive damages against TASER, which were subsequently
disallowed by the Court on October 24, 2008. The Court denied the balance of the Companys motion
for judgment as a matter of law on all other grounds. The Company has filed a notice of appeal with
respect to the judgment and plaintiffs have filed a notice of cross appeal.
49
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
With
respect to each of the pending 51 lawsuits, the following table lists the name of
plaintiff, the date the Company was served with process, the jurisdiction in which the case is
pending, the type of claim and the status of the matter. While the facts vary from case to case,
the product liability claims are typically based on an alleged product defect resulting in injury
or death, usually involving a failure to warn, and the plaintiffs are seeking monetary damages.
This table also lists those cases that were dismissed or judgment entered during the most recent
fiscal quarter. Cases that were dismissed or judgment entered in prior fiscal quarters are not
included in this table. The claims and in some instances, the defense of each of these lawsuits has
been submitted to our insurance carriers that maintained insurance coverage during these applicable
periods and we continue to maintain product liability insurance coverage with varying limits and
deductibles. Our product liability insurance coverage during these periods ranged from $5,000,000
to $10,000,000 in coverage limits and from $10,000 to $1,000,000 in per incident deductibles. We
are defending each of these lawsuits vigorously and do not expect these lawsuits to individually
and in the aggregate, materially affect our business, results of operations or financial condition.
Plaintiff | Served | Jurisdiction | Claim Type | Status | ||||
Glowczenski
|
Oct-04 | US District Court, ED NY | Wrongful Death | Trial rescheduled, date to be determined | ||||
Washington
|
May-05 | US District Court, ED CA | Wrongful Death | Stay has been lifted | ||||
Bagnell
|
Jul-06 | Supreme Court for British Columbia, Canada | Wrongful Death | Dismissed | ||||
Hollman
|
Aug-06 | US District Court, ED NY | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase | ||||
Oliver
|
Sep-06 | US District Court, MD FL, Orlando Division | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled June 2011 | ||||
Augustine
|
Jan-07 | 11th Judicial Circuit Court, Miami-Dade, FL | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled September 2011 | ||||
Wendy Wilson, Estate of Ryan Wilson
|
Aug-07 | District Court Boulder County, CO | Wrongful Death | Trial scheduled August 2011 | ||||
Jack Wilson, Estate of Ryan Wilson (Companion to Wendy Wilson)
|
Nov-07 | District Court Boulder County, CO | Wrongful Death | Trial scheduled August 2011 | ||||
Salinas
|
Aug-08 | US District Court, ND CA | Wrongful Death | Motion Phase,off trial calendar | ||||
Thomas (Pike)
|
Oct-08 | US District Court, WD Louisiana, Alexandria | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase | ||||
Carroll
|
Mar-09 | US District Court, SD TX | Wrongful Death | Dismissal Pending | ||||
Shrum
|
May-09 | Allen County District Court, Iola, KS | Wrongful Death | Trial Scheduled February 2012 | ||||
Athetis
|
May-09 | US District Court, AZ | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase | ||||
Abrahams
|
Jul-09 | CA Superior Court, Yolo County | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase-trial scheduled November 2011 | ||||
Humphreys
|
Oct-09 | CA Superior Court, San Joaquin County | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase | ||||
Terriquez
|
Feb-10 | Superior Court of CA, Orange County | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase, trial scheuduled July 2011 | ||||
Rich
|
Feb-10 | US District Court, NV | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase | ||||
McKenzie
|
Feb-10 | US Disctrict Court, ED CA | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled April 2012 | ||||
Turner
|
Feb-10 | General Court of Justice, Superior Court Div, Mecklenburg County, NC | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled July 2011 | ||||
Doan
|
Apr-10 | Queens Bench Alberta, Red Deer Judicial Dist. | Wrongful Death | Pleading Phase | ||||
Piskkura
|
May-10 | US District Court, OH | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase, trial scheuduled March 2012 | ||||
Corbin
|
Jun-10 | Houston County Court, AL | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase, trial scheuduled October 2011 | ||||
Swayzer
|
Jun-10 | US District Court, ND CA | Wrongful Death | Dismissed | ||||
DuBoise
|
Aug-10 | US District Court, ED MO | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase | ||||
Vaugn
|
Sep-10 | US District Court, ND CA | Wrongful Death | Dismissed | ||||
Kelly
|
Oct-10 | District Court for Harris County, TX | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase | ||||
Jacobs
|
Oct-10 | District Court for Travis County, TX | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase | ||||
Woodward
|
Nov-10 | Sumner County TN Court, 18th Judicial District | Wrongful Death | Dismissed | ||||
Juran
|
Dec-10 | Hennepin County District Court, 4th Judicial District | Wrongful Death | Pleading Phase | ||||
Shymco
|
Dec-10 | The Queens Bench, Winnipeg Centre, Manitoba | Wrongful Death | Pleading Phase | ||||
Williams
|
Dec-10 | US District Court, MS | Wrongful Death | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled April 2012 | ||||
Stewart
|
Oct-05 | Circuit Court for Broward County, FL | Training Injury | Discovery Phase | ||||
Lewandowski
|
Jan-06 | US District Court, NV | Training Injury | Dismissed | ||||
Husband
|
Mar-06 | British Columbia Supreme Court, Canada | Training Injury | Discovery Phase | ||||
Grable
|
Aug-08 | FL 6th Judicial Circuit Court, Pinellas County | Training Injury | Discovery Phase | ||||
Koon
|
Dec-08 | 17th Judicial Circuit Court, Broward County, FL | Training Injury | Discovery Phase | ||||
Bickle
|
Mar-09 | 18th Judicial District Court, Gallatin County, MT | Training Injury | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled December 2011 | ||||
Foley
|
Mar-09 | US District Court, MA | Training Injury | Dismissed | ||||
Peppler
|
Apr-09 | Circuit Court 5th Judicial Dist., Sumter City, FL | Training Injury | Discovery Phase | ||||
Kandt
|
Jun-09 | US District Court, ND NY | Training Injury | Discovery Phase | ||||
Ginger
|
Apr-10 | Iowa District Court, Marion County | Training Injury | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled January 2012 | ||||
Maynard
|
Nov-10 | Superior Court, Hartford Judicial District, CT | Training Injury | Discovery Phase | ||||
Hollenback
|
Dec-10 | St. Louis County Circuit Court MO | Officer Injury | Discovery Phase | ||||
Butler
|
Jan-11 | US District Court, ND TX | Training Injury | Discovery Phase | ||||
Strough
|
Feb-11 | US District Court, ED MO | Officer Injury | Pleading Phase | ||||
Lucas
|
Jun-09 | US District Court, ED CA | Injury During Arrest | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled May 2012 | ||||
Wheat
|
Jul-09 | CA Superior Court, Los Angeles County | Injury During Arrest | Discovery Phase, off trial calendar | ||||
Derbyshire
|
Nov-09 | Ontario Superior Court of Justice | Officer Injury | Discovery Phase | ||||
Fahy
|
Dec-09 | Circuit Court of City of St. Louis | Injury During Arrest | Discovery Phase | ||||
Tylecki
|
Jan-10 | US District Court, DE | Injury During Arrest | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled July 2012 | ||||
Thompson
|
Mar-10 | 11th Judicial Circuit Court Miami-Dade County, FL | Injury During Arrest | Discovery Phase | ||||
Wilson
|
Apr-10 | US District Court, ND IL, ED | Injury During Arrest | Discovery Phase | ||||
Patterson
|
Jun-10 | Circuit Court Pontotoc County, MS | Injury During Arrest | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled January 2012 | ||||
Hadnot
|
Sep-10 | US District Court, ED TX | Injury During Arrest | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled October 2011 | ||||
Streeter
|
Dec-10 | US District Court, OR | Injury During Arrest | Discovery Phase, trial scheduled April 2012 | ||||
Bailey
|
Feb-11 | US District Court, MD AL | Injury During Incarceration | Pleading Phase | ||||
Valkanet
|
Mar-11 | US District Court, ND IL | Injury During Arrest | Pleading Phase | ||||
Sanders
|
Mar-11 | US District Court, ND IL | Injury During Arrest | Pleading Phase |
50
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Other Litigation
In October 2007, we filed a lawsuit in Arizona Superior Court for Maricopa County against
Steve Ward and Mark Johnson, both former TASER employees and VIEVU LLC, et. al. for breach of duty
of loyalty, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and conversion. This lawsuit does not
involve our ECD business and we do not expect this litigation to have a material impact on our
financial results. Defendants Ward and VIEVU LLC filed an answer and counterclaim for declaration
of non-infringement, tortious interference with contractual relations, tortious interference with
business expectancy, and abuse of process. The lawsuit seeks compensatory damages, constructive
trust, exemplary damages, injunctive relief attorneys fees, costs and disbursements. Cross motions
for summary judgment were filed and on March 4, 2009, the Court denied Defendants motion for
summary judgment on the trade secret claim and on April 9, 2009, the Court granted TASERs motion
for summary judgment against Ward on the breach of fiduciary duty and the breach of duty of loyalty
claims. We filed a Motion to Extend Discovery Period by and to reconvene the Deposition of Steve
Ward, and Defendants have filed Defendants Response in Opposition to this motion. In addition,
Defendants Steve Ward and VIEVU LLC have filed a Motion for Reconsideration or in the alternative
to make the Courts Ruling a Final Judgment and Stay Proceeding Pending Outcome of Appeal. The
Court denied the Motion for Reconsideration, but granted the motion to make the Courts Ruling a
Final Judgment and Stayed the Proceeding Pending Outcome of Appeal. An appeal has been filed by
Defendants Ward and VIEVU LLC to the Arizona State Court of Appeals. The appellate court reversed
the Superior Court and remanded the case back to Superior Court for trial. On June 14, 2010 TASER
filed a petition for review with the Arizona Supreme Court and Ward filed a cross petition for
review on June 29, 2010. The Arizona Supreme Court declined review of either petition and a trial
date has been set for August 2011.
In June 2008, we filed an amended complaint in the State Court of Fulton County, Georgia
joining as a plaintiff in an existing lawsuit previously filed by certain current and former
stockholders of the Company against Morgan Stanley & Co., Inc., and ten other brokerage firms
alleging a conspiracy to unlawfully, deceptively, and fraudulently manipulate the price of the
Companys common stock in the context of illegal naked shorting. Specifically, the amended
complaint alleges that the defendants committed conspiracy and endeavored to violate the Georgia
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act; Securities Fraud; Theft By Taking; Theft By
Deception; Violation of The Georgia Computer Systems Protection Act; Violation of the Georgia
Securities Act; Violation of the Georgia Computer Systems Protection Act; and Conversion. The
lawsuit seeks compensatory and punitive damages as well as expenses of litigation including
attorneys fees and costs. Defendants have filed motions to dismiss or alternatively a motion for a
more definite statement and, on July 29, 2009, the Court entered an order denying Defendants
motion to dismiss and alternatively a motion for a more definite statement. Discovery has begun in
this litigation and no trial date has been set. Defendants removed the case to United States
District Court for the District of Georgia and Plaintiffs have filed a motion to remand the case
back to state court. The court has not yet ruled on this motion to
remand. We have reached a settlement agreement with four of the defendants.
In February 2009, we filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of
Nevada against James F. McNulty, Jr., Robert Gruder, and Stinger Systems, Inc. alleging securities
fraud under 15 U.S.C. § 78j, trade libel, unfair competition under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §
1125, abuse of process, and deceptive trade practices. Our complaint seeks compensatory damages,
punitive damages, injunctive relief, attorneys fees and costs. Defendants filed motions to
dismiss and on March 25, 2010 the Court denied Defendants motion on all claims except the
securities fraud claim. Defendant McNulty filed a counterclaim on August 2, 2010 alleging that
TASERs XREP product infringes U.S. Patents 5,831,199 and 6,877,434. The counterclaim seeks
declaratory and injunctive relief, compensatory, treble and punitive damages, and attorneys fees.
On August 26, 2010 we filed a motion to strike immaterial, impertinent and scandalous matter in the
counterclaim and to dismiss claims for indirect infringement from Defendant McNultys counterclaim.
To date, the court has not yet ruled on this motion. No trial date has been set.
In December 2009, we filed a complaint in Maricopa County Superior Court, Arizona against
Interwoven Inc. et. al. alleging breach of contract, misrepresentation and fraud for failure to
comply with a settlement agreement regarding an e-discovery services dispute. Our complaint seeks
compensatory damages, attorneys fees and costs. Defendant has filed a motion to compel arbitration
which is pending. Defendant filed a motion to compel arbitration and on April 7, 2010 the Court
entered an order compelling arbitration and staying the litigation. On April 26, 2010, we filed a
motion to certify this order as a final order in order to file an appeal from the Courts ruling.
On June 21, 2010 the Arizona Superior Court ordered this matter to arbitration and stayed the
matter pending the arbitration. This case was resolved to the satisfaction of both parties and the
lawsuit was dismissed.
51
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
In January 2011 we were served with a complaint in the matter of GEOTAG, Inc. v. TASER
International, et. al. that was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of Texas, Marshall Division which alleges that a dealer geographical locator feature on TASERs
website infringes upon plaintiffs US Patent No. 5,930,474. The complaint seeks a judgment of
infringement, a permanent injunction against infringement, an award for damages, costs, expenses
and prejudgment and post-judgment interest, and an award for enhanced damages and attorneys fees.
TASER has licensed this locator feature from a third party and has denied liability for
infringement. This lawsuit is at the pleading phase and no trial date has been set.
General
From time to time, the Company is notified that it may be a party to a lawsuit or that a claim
is being made against it. It is the Companys policy to not disclose the specifics of any claim or
threatened lawsuit until the summons and complaint are actually served on the Company. After
carefully assessing the claim, and assuming we determine that we are not at fault, we vigorously
defend and pursue any lawsuit filed against or by the Company. Although we do not expect the
outcome in any pending individual case to be material, the outcome of any litigation is inherently
uncertain and there can be no assurance that any expense, liability or damages that may ultimately
result from the resolution of these matters will be covered by our insurance or will not be in
excess of amounts provided by insurance coverage and will not have a material adverse effect on our
business, operating results or financial condition. In addition, the Company has two lawsuits where
the costs of legal defense incurred are in excess of its liability insurance deductibles. As of
December 31, 2010, the Company has been fully reimbursed by its insurance company for these legal
costs. The Company may settle a lawsuit in situations where a settlement can be obtained for
nuisance value and for an amount that is expected to be less than the cost of defending a lawsuit.
The number of product liability lawsuits dismissed includes a small number of police officer
training injury lawsuits that were settled by the Company and dismissed in cases where the
settlement economics to the Company were significantly less than the cost of litigation. In
addition, it is the Companys policy to not settle suspect injury or death cases, although the
Companys insurance company may settle such lawsuits over the Companys objection where the case is
over the Companys liability insurance deductibles. Due to the confidentiality of our litigation
strategy and the confidentiality agreements that are executed in the event of a settlement, the
Company does not identify or comment on which specific lawsuits have been settled or the amount of
any settlement.
d. Employment Agreements
The Company has employment agreements with its Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, President
and General Counsel, Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice President of Marketing, and Technical
Research and Development Fellow. The Company may terminate the agreements with or without cause.
Should the Company terminate the agreements without cause, or upon a change of control of the
Company or death of the employee, the employees are entitled to additional compensation. Under
these circumstances, these officers and employees may receive the amounts remaining under their
contracts upon termination, which would total $1.0 million in the aggregate at December 31, 2010.
52
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
8. Income Taxes
Significant components of the Companys deferred income tax assets and liabilities are as
follows:
December 31, | ||||||||
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Deferred income tax assets |
||||||||
Net operating loss carryforward |
$ | 1,875,491 | $ | 92,262 | ||||
Deferred warranty revenue |
1,820,670 | 1,898,388 | ||||||
Reserves, accruals and other |
1,395,611 | 1,326,190 | ||||||
Non-employee stock option expense |
314,824 | 313,631 | ||||||
Non-qualified stock option expense |
1,867,643 | 1,535,105 | ||||||
Capitalized R&D |
11,314,412 | 12,982,041 | ||||||
Alternative minimum tax carryforward |
1,636,024 | 1,555,075 | ||||||
R&D tax credit |
4,147,763 | 3,787,498 | ||||||
UNICAP |
504,398 | 422,839 | ||||||
Deferred income tax assets |
24,876,836 | 23,913,029 | ||||||
Deferred income tax liabilities |
||||||||
Depreciation |
(4,413,386 | ) | (4,134,443 | ) | ||||
Amortization |
(147,366 | ) | (110,799 | ) | ||||
Section 481(a) adjustment |
(111,842 | ) | (222,779 | ) | ||||
Deferred income tax liabilities |
(4,672,594 | ) | (4,468,021 | ) | ||||
Net deferred income tax assets before valuation allowance |
20,204,242 | 19,445,008 | ||||||
Less: Valuation allowance |
| | ||||||
Net deferred income tax assets |
$ | 20,204,242 | $ | 19,445,008 | ||||
Reported as: |
||||||||
Current deferred tax assets |
$ | 6,284,489 | $ | 8,447,915 | ||||
Long-term deferred tax assets |
13,919,753 | 10,997,093 | ||||||
$ | 20,204,242 | $ | 19,445,008 | |||||
The Company fully utilized its remaining federal net operating loss carry forward (NOL) for
financial reporting purposes of $10.0 million during 2009. In 2010 the Company generated a net
operating loss carry forward (NOL) for financial reporting purposes of $4.7 million. The federal
NOL for tax purposes remaining at December 31, 2010 is estimated to be $12.3 million. The Companys
federal NOL carryforward expires in 2030. The Companys remaining deferred tax assets of $106,000
related to state NOLs expire at various dates between 2014 and 2025. The Company has federal and
state research and development credit carryovers of $1.7 million and $2.4 million, respectively
which expire at various dates beginning in 2023 for federal purposes and 2018 for state purposes.
The Company has a minimum tax credit carryover of $1.7 million which does not expire.
The Company recognizes the income tax benefits associated with certain stock compensation
deductions only when such deductions produce a reduction to the companys actual tax liability.
Accordingly, in 2010 and 2009 the Company recognized benefits of $52,000 and $32,000, respectively,
for the reduction of state taxes payable, which was recorded as a credit to additional paid in
capital. In 2010 approximately $329,000 of deferred tax assets related to non-qualified stock
option expense were reversed with the offsetting entry against additional paid-in capital related
to forfeited non-qualified stock options for which no tax benefit will be realized.
53
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
In preparing the Companys consolidated financial statements, management has assessed the
likelihood that its deferred income tax assets will be realized from future taxable income. In
evaluating the ability to recover its deferred income tax assets, management considers all
available evidence, positive and negative; including the Companys operating results, ongoing tax
planning and forecasts of future taxable income on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis. A
valuation allowance is established if it is determined that it is more likely than not that some
portion or all of the net deferred income tax assets will not be realized. Management exercises
significant judgment in determining the Companys provisions for income taxes, its deferred income
tax assets and liabilities and its future taxable income for purposes of assessing its ability to
utilize any future tax benefit from its deferred income tax assets.
Although management believes that its tax estimates are reasonable, the ultimate tax
determination involves significant judgments that could become subject to audit by tax authorities
in the ordinary course of business. During 2009, management determined that it was more likely than
not that its net operating loss carryforwards for the state of Arizona, which would have expired in
2009, would be fully realized. Accordingly, the valuation allowance of $200,000 the Company carried
against its deferred tax assets as of December 31, 2008, was reversed with the benefit recognized
during 2009 as a reduction of the 2009 effective tax rate. Management believes that as of December
31, 2010, based on an evaluation and projections of future sales and profitability, no other
valuation allowance was deemed necessary as management concluded that it is more likely than not
that the Companys net deferred income tax assets will be realized. However, the deferred tax asset
could be reduced in the near-term if estimates of future taxable income during the carryforward
period are reduced.
Significant components of the provision (benefit) for income taxes are as follows:
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Current |
||||||||||||
Federal |
$ | 270,437 | $ | 417,722 | $ | 414,094 | ||||||
State |
71,494 | 290,215 | 239,539 | |||||||||
Total Current |
341,931 | 707,937 | 653,633 | |||||||||
Deferred |
||||||||||||
Federal |
(939,803 | ) | (427,332 | ) | 2,520,677 | |||||||
State |
(148,574 | ) | (760,825 | ) | (460,054 | ) | ||||||
Total Deferred |
(1,088,377 | ) | (1,188,157 | ) | 2,060,623 | |||||||
Tax provision (benefit) recorded as an increase (decrease) in liability for unrecorded tax benefits |
17,061 | 572,699 | 592,007 | |||||||||
Provision (benefit) for Income Taxes |
$ | (729,385 | ) | $ | 92,479 | $ | 3,306,263 | |||||
54
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company is subject to federal, state and foreign taxes; however, no separate calculation of the foreign provision or
deferred tax assets was calculated in the current year due to the minimal amount of book income in the foreign subsidiary and the
comparability of the foreign tax rate to the U.S. tax rate. A reconciliation of the Companys effective income tax rate to the federal statutory rate follows:
For the Year Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Federal income tax at the statutory rate |
(1,789,837 | ) | 31,981 | 2,430,156 | ||||||||
State income taxes, net of federal benefit (a) |
(103,651 | ) | (502,186 | ) | 333,279 | |||||||
Permanent differences (b) |
870,757 | 1,097,908 | 853,450 | |||||||||
Research and development |
(163,883 | ) | (990,867 | ) | (729,047 | ) | ||||||
Return to provision adjustment (c) |
265,028 | 111,652 | | |||||||||
Change in liability for unrecognized tax
benefits |
17,061 | 572,699 | 592,007 | |||||||||
Change in valuation allowance |
| (200,000 | ) | (48,603 | ) | |||||||
Other |
175,140 | (28,708 | ) | (124,979 | ) | |||||||
Income tax Expense |
(729,385 | ) | 92,479 | 3,306,263 | ||||||||
Effective Tax Rate |
14.3 | % | 101.2 | % | 33.3 | % |
a) | The 2009 benefit for state income taxes is primarily driven by current year utilization
of Arizona research and development credits |
|
b) | Permanent differences include certain expenses which are not deductible for tax
purposes including lobbying fees and stock-based compensation expense related to Incentive
Stock Options (ISOs). |
|
c) | The 2010 return to provision adjustment was driven by lower than estimated 2009
research and development tax credits, which reduced the net tax benefit and therefore the
effective tax rate. |
The Company has completed research and development tax credit studies which identified
approximately $5.9 million in tax credits for Federal, Arizona and California income tax purposes
related to the 2003 through 2010 tax years, net of the federal benefit on the Arizona and
California research and development tax credits. Management has made the determination that it is
more likely than not that the full benefit of the research and development tax credit will not be
sustained on examination and recorded a liability for unrecognized tax benefits of $2.2 million as
of December 31, 2010. In addition, management accrued approximately $106,000 for estimated
uncertain tax positions related to certain state income tax liabilities. As of December 31, 2010,
management does not expect the amount of the unrecognized tax benefit liability to increase or
decrease significantly within the next 12 months. Should the unrecognized tax benefit of $2.3
million be recognized, the Companys effective tax rate would be favorably impacted.
The following presents a rollforward of our liability for unrecognized tax benefits as of
December 31:
2010 | 2009 | |||||||
Balance at January 1, |
$ | 2,264,779 | $ | 1,692,080 | ||||
Increase in prior year tax positions |
| | ||||||
Increase in current year tax positions |
58,830 | 477,717 | ||||||
Increase (decrease) related to adjustment of previous estimates of activity |
(41,769 | ) | 94,982 | |||||
Decrease related to settlements with taxing authorities |
| | ||||||
Decrease related to lapse in statute of limitations |
| | ||||||
Balance at December 31, |
$ | 2,281,840 | $ | 2,264,779 | ||||
Federal income tax returns for 2006 through 2009 remain open to examination by the
United States Internal Revenue Service (the IRS), while state and local income tax returns for
2002 through 2009 also remain open to examination. The Company has been notified it will be subject
to examination in the following major jurisdictions for the years specified: California 2007-2010,
Washington 2007-2010 and Virginia 2008. An examination by the IRS for 2006 was completed in the
third quarter of 2008 with no significant adjustment required by the IRS.
55
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
9. Line of Credit
The Company has a line of credit agreement with a total availability facility of $10 million.
The line is secured primarily by the Companys accounts receivable and inventory and bears interest
at varying rates, ranging from LIBOR plus 1.5% to prime. The availability under this line is
computed on a monthly borrowing base, which is based on the Companys eligible accounts receivable
and inventory. The line of credit matures on June 30, 2011 and requires monthly payments of
interest only. The Company expects to renew the line on similar terms upon its maturity. At
December 31, 2010, there was no amount outstanding under the line of credit and the available
borrowing under the existing line of credit was approximately $4.4 million. There were no
borrowings under the line during the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009.
The Companys agreement with the bank requires compliance with certain financial and other
covenants including maintenance of minimum tangible net worth and a fixed charge coverage ratio.
The ratio of total liabilities to tangible net worth can be no greater than 1:1, and the fixed
coverage charge ratio can be no less than 1.25:1, based upon a trailing twelve month period. At
December 31, 2010, the Companys tangible net worth ratio was 0.16:1 and its fixed charge coverage
ratio was 2.33:1. Accordingly, the Company was in compliance with those covenants.
10. Stockholders Equity
a. Common Stock and Preferred Stock
The Company has authorized the issuance of two classes of stock designated as common stock
and preferred stock, each having a par value of $0.00001 per share. The Company is authorized to
issue is 200 million shares of common stock and 25 million shares of preferred stock.
b. Stock Repurchase
In April 2008, TASERs Board of Directors authorized a stock repurchase program to acquire up
to $12.5 million of the Companys outstanding common stock subject to stock market conditions and
corporate considerations. During 2008, the Company repurchased 1.79 million shares at a weighted
average cost of $6.98 per share and a total cost of $12.5 million.
c. Stock Option Plans
The Company has historically issued stock options to various equity owners and key employees
as a means of attracting and retaining quality personnel. The option holders have the right to
purchase a stated number of shares at the market price on the grant date. The options issued under
the Companys 1999 Stock Option Plan (the 1999 Plan), 2001 Stock Option Plan (the 2001 Plan)
and 2004 Stock Option Plan (the 2004 Plan) generally vest over a three-year period and have a
contractual maturity of ten years; however, the majority of options issued under the 2004 Plan
within fiscal 2005 had vesting terms of one year. The shares issuable under each of the plans were
registered on Form S-8 with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.
On March 31, 2009, the Companys Board of Directors approved, subject to stockholder approval,
the 2009 Stock Incentive Plan (the 2009 Plan), under which the Company reserved 1,000,000 shares
of common stock available for future grants. The 2009 Stock Incentive Plan was approved at the
Annual Meeting of Stockholders on May 28, 2009. Options issued under the 2009 Plan generally vest
over a three to four-year period and have a contractual maturity of ten years.
The total number of shares registered under these plans was as follows: 9,952,500 under the
1999 Plan, 6,600,000 under the 2001 Plan, 6,800,000 under the 2004 Plan and 1,000,000 under the
2009 Plan. These plans provide for officers, key employees, directors and consultants to receive
nontransferable stock options to purchase an aggregate of 24,352,500 shares of the Companys common
stock. As of December 31, 2010, 2,478,768 options remain available for future grants.
56
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
d. Stock Option Exchange Program
On December 27, 2010, the Company completed a stock exchange program, which provided employees
holding certain options the opportunity to exchange outstanding options granted pursuant to the
Companys 1999 Plan, 2001 Plan, and 2004 Plan, for a lesser amount of new options to be granted
with lower exercise prices. The exchange offer commenced on November 24, 2010, and expired on
December 27, 2010. Stock options eligible for exchange were those that had an exercise price per
share greater than $8.00, and that had not expired before December 27, 2010. As of November 24,
2010, 867,540 options were eligible for exchange. Neither our executive officers nor members of our
Board of Directors were eligible to participate in the exchange offer.
A total of 463,306 options were tendered by employees, representing approximately 53% of the
total stock options eligible for exchange. On December 28, 2010, the Company granted an aggregate
of 221,723 new options under the 2009 Stock Incentive Plan in exchange for the eligible options
surrendered. The exercise price of the new options is $4.84 per share, which was the closing price
of the Companys Common Stock on December 27, 2010 as reported by the NASDAQ Global Select Market.
An incremental stock option expense of approximately $10,000 will be recognized over the three-year
vesting period of the newly granted options.
Stock Option Activity
A summary of the Companys stock options at December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 and for the years
then ended is presented in the table below:
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Weighted | Weighted | Weighted | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Average | Average | Average | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Exercise | Exercise | Exercise | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Options | Price | Options | Price | Options | Price | |||||||||||||||||||
Options outstanding, beginning of year |
8,780,067 | $ | 5.94 | 9,108,930 | $ | 5.87 | 5,234,072 | $ | 6.06 | |||||||||||||||
Granted under option exchange program |
221,723 | $ | 4.84 | | $ | | | $ | | |||||||||||||||
Granted |
988,941 | $ | 5.08 | 551,270 | $ | 4.56 | 4,285,671 | $ | 5.38 | |||||||||||||||
Exercised |
(502,205 | ) | $ | 1.99 | (323,351 | ) | $ | 0.48 | (323,409 | ) | $ | 1.06 | ||||||||||||
Expired/terminated |
(1,517,934 | ) | $ | 7.28 | (556,782 | ) | $ | 6.36 | (87,404 | ) | $ | 11.29 | ||||||||||||
Cancelled under option exchange program |
(463,306 | ) | $ | 11.66 | | $ | | | $ | | ||||||||||||||
Options outstanding, end of year |
7,507,286 | $ | 5.71 | 8,780,067 | $ | 5.94 | 9,108,930 | $ | 5.87 | |||||||||||||||
Exercisable at end of year |
5,967,590 | $ | 5.99 | 5,988,159 | $ | 6.23 | 4,901,483 | $ | 6.02 | |||||||||||||||
Options available for grant at end of year |
2,478,768 | 1,708,192 | 702,680 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Weighted average fair value of options granted during the year |
$ | 2.59 | $ | 2.56 | $ | 2.89 |
The following table summarizes information about stock options outstanding and exercisable as
of December 31, 2010:
Options Outstanding | Options Exercisable | |||||||||||||||||||
Weighted | ||||||||||||||||||||
Weighted | Average | Weighted | ||||||||||||||||||
Average | Remaining | Average | ||||||||||||||||||
Number | Exercise | Contractual | Number | Exercise | ||||||||||||||||
Range of Exercise Price | Outstanding | Price | Life | Exercisable | Price | |||||||||||||||
$0.28 - $0.99 |
476,668 | $ | 0.37 | 2.2 | 476,668 | $ | 0.37 | |||||||||||||
$1.03 - $2.41 |
651,547 | $ | 1.62 | 1.8 | 651,547 | $ | 1.62 | |||||||||||||
$3.53 - $9.93 |
5,820,458 | $ | 5.95 | 6.9 | 4,280,762 | $ | 6.49 | |||||||||||||
$10.07 - $19.76 |
533,413 | $ | 11.94 | 4.9 | 533,413 | $ | 11.94 | |||||||||||||
$20.12 - $29.98 |
25,200 | $ | 23.01 | 3.4 | 25,200 | $ | 23.01 | |||||||||||||
$0.28 - $29.98 |
7,507,286 | $ | 5.71 | 6.0 | 5,967,590 | $ | 5.99 | |||||||||||||
57
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The total fair value of options exercisable was approximately $18.7 million, $19.3 million and
$15.4 million at December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The aggregate intrinsic value of
options outstanding and options exercisable at December 31, 2010 was $4.5 million and $4.2 million,
respectively. The aggregate intrinsic value of unvested options at December 31, 2010 was
approximately $291,000. Aggregate intrinsic value represents the difference between the Companys
closing stock price on the last trading day of the fiscal period, which was $4.70 as of December
31, 2010, and the exercise price of the option multiplied by the number of options outstanding.
Total intrinsic value of options exercised was $2.2 million, $1.3 million, and $2.4 million for the
years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
At December 31, 2010, the Company had 1,539,696 unvested options outstanding with a weighted
average exercise price of $4.93 per share, weighted average fair value of $2.32 per share and
weighted average remaining contractual life of 8.6 years. Of the unvested options outstanding at
December 31, 2010, the Company expects that 1,475,593 options will ultimately vest based on its
historical experience.
Stock-based Compensation Expense
The Company accounts for share-based compensation using the fair-value method. Reported
share-based compensation was classified as follows for the years ended December 31:
2010 | 2009 | 2008 | ||||||||||
Stock-based compensation was allocated as follows: |
||||||||||||
Indirect manufacturing expense |
$ | 300,787 | $ | 349,243 | $ | 257,964 | ||||||
Sales, general and administrative expenses |
2,728,360 | 3,218,735 | 1,552,411 | |||||||||
Research and development expenses |
653,528 | 1,420,859 | 613,510 | |||||||||
$ | 3,682,675 | $ | 4,988,837 | $ | 2,423,885 | |||||||
As of December 31, 2010, total unrecognized stock-based compensation expense related
to non-vested stock options was approximately $4.3 million, which is expected to be recognized over
a total weighted average period of approximately 12.8 months. Approximately $2.8 million of this
expense is expected to be recognized in 2011.
Total share-based compensation expense recognized in the statement of operations for the years
ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 includes $1,900,000, $2,550,000, and $1,438,000,
respectively, related to ISOs for which no tax benefit is recognized. The total deferred tax
benefits related to non-qualified stock options were approximately $1.5 million and $0.6 million
for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. In 2009 the Company recorded a tax
benefit of $32,000 to offset taxes payable related to the non-qualified disposition of ISOs
exercised and sold. The total unrecognized tax benefit related to the non-qualified disposition of
stock options in 2010, 2009 and 2008 was approximately $2.2 million, $1.3 million and $1.2 million,
respectively.
The Company granted 925,800 performance-based stock options in 2008, 2009, and the first half
of 2010, the vesting of which is contingent upon the achievement of certain performance criteria
related to the successful and timely development and market acceptance of future product
introductions, as well as the future operating performance of the Company. Compensation expense is
recognized over the implicit service period (the date the performance condition is expected to be
achieved) based on managements estimate of the probability of the performance criteria being
satisfied, adjusted at each balance sheet date. Management determined that 225,000 and 106,700 of
these options were forfeited during 2010 and 2009, respectively. Of the remaining 594,100
outstanding options, 269,220 options are exercisable and 324,880 are unvested. The fair value of
the remaining 311,430 performance-based options outstanding and still expected to vest was
estimated to be $787,000. The Company recognized $0.1 million, $0.8 million and $0.1 million of
related stock based compensation expense during 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
58
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
11. Related Party Transactions
Aircraft Charter
The Company reimburses Thomas P. Smith, Chairman of the Companys Board of Directors, and
Patrick W. Smith, Chief Executive Officer, for business use of their personal aircraft. For the
years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, the Company incurred expenses of approximately
$162,000, $274,000, and $197,000 respectively, to Thomas P. Smith. For the years ended December 31,
2010, 2009, and 2008, the Company incurred expenses of approximately $0, $10,000, and $107,000,
respectively, to Patrick W. Smith. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company had outstanding
payables of approximately $0 and $15,000, respectively, to Thomas P. Smith. At December 31, 2010
and 2009, the Company had no outstanding payables due to Patrick W. Smith. Management believes that
the rates charged by Thomas P. Smith and Patrick W. Smith are equal to or below commercial rates
the Company would pay to charter similar aircraft from independent charter companies.
TASER Foundation
In November 2004, the Company established the TASER Foundation. The TASER Foundation is an
Internal Revenue Code Section 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation and has been granted tax exempt
status by the IRS. The TASER Foundations mission is to honor the service and sacrifice of local
and federal law enforcement officers in the United States and Canada lost in the line of duty by
providing financial support to their families. Over half of the initial $1 million endowment was
contributed directly by the Companys employees. The Company bears all administrative costs of the
TASER Foundation in order to ensure 100% of all donations are distributed to the families of fallen
officers. For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, the Company incurred approximately
$95,000, $265,000, and $233,000, respectively, in such administrative costs. For the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, the Company contributed $0, $35,000, and $25,000, respectively,
to the TASER Foundation.
Consulting Services
The Company engages Mark Kroll, a member of the Board of Directors, to provide consulting
services. The expenses related to these services for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008 were approximately $160,000, $251,000, and $293,000, respectively. At December 31, 2010 and
2009, the Company had accrued liabilities of approximately $20,000 and $14,000, respectively,
related to these services.
Settlement Agreement
On May 15, 2009, Bruce and Donna Culver, husband and wife (the Culvers), and the Company,
entered into a settlement and release agreement (the Agreement), the background and material
terms of which are described below. Mr. Culver has served as a director of the Company since
January 1994 until his retirement on April 9, 2010.
In July 2000, the Culvers provided a loan to the Company in exchange for a promissory note and
warrants to purchase 136,364 shares of the Companys common stock for $0.55 per share. In October
2004, the Culvers exercised the warrants, and the Company issued them a Form 1099, which included
the in-the-money value of the warrants as stock compensation based upon the advice of the Companys
then-current outside tax advisors. In 2007, the Culvers informed the Company that their personal
tax advisors had determined that the 2004 Form 1099 was not the proper tax treatment for the
transaction, and that the value of the warrants should not have been included as compensation
because the warrants were issued in connection with the loan rather than services. The Company
responded by issuing an amended Form 1099 excluding the value of the warrants, and the Culvers
filed an amended 2004 federal tax return seeking a refund. The Culvers are also seeking a refund
with respect to their 2004 California tax return.
The parties entered into the Agreement to settle any disputes that the Culvers might have with
the Company in connection with the original Form 1099 that was issued in October 2004 and the
Culvers resulting tax liability. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Company agreed to pay the Culvers
$350,000 upon execution in exchange for a full release, which is recorded in sales, general and
administrative expense for the year ended December 31, 2009. The Agreement also contains a
claw-back provision, pursuant to which the Culvers agreed to pay to the Company the amount of any
refund they receive from the federal government and/or the State of California, up to the $350,000
amount of the settlement payment. The Culvers will be entitled to keep 100% of any refund(s) they
receive in excess of $350,000. The Culvers
received a refund from the Internal Revenue Service in February 2010 and they continue to seek a
refund with respect to the State of California. The Company is working with the Culvers regarding
the timing and the form of this payment.
59
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
12. Employee Benefit Plan
The Company has a defined contribution profit sharing 401(k) plan (the Plan) for eligible
employees, which is qualified under Sections 401(a) and 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of
1986, as amended. Employees are entitled to make tax-deferred contributions of up to the maximum
allowed by law of their eligible compensation, but not exceeding $16,500 in 2010. The Company
matches 100% of the first 3% of eligible compensation contributed to the Plan by each participant
and 50% of the next 2% of eligible compensation contributed to the Plan by each participant.
Beginning January 1, 2008, the Companys matching contributions are immediately vested. The
Companys matching contributions to the Plan for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008
were approximately $490,000, $475,000, and $398,000, respectively. Future matching or profit
sharing contributions to the Plan are at the Companys sole discretion.
13. Joint Venture Agreement
On January 13, 2010, the Company entered into a Joint Venture Agreement (the Protector Group
Agreement) with RouteCloud, LLC (RouteCloud) and certain other parties to establish the TASER
Protector Group to exclusively develop, market, sell and support a new suite of products
(Protector Products) that give parents the ability to manage their childrens mobile phone usage
and driving behaviors though a simple-to-use interface on a mobile phone, computer or TV. The
Company agreed to provide RouteCloud development funding up to $1.7 million, $0.3 million of which
was funded in the fourth quarter of 2009 under a letter of understanding between the parties.
During 2010, $1.2 million was funded under the Joint Venture agreement prior to revision on
November 2, 2010.
On November 2, 2010, the Company entered into a revised agreement with RouteCloud and the
other parties to the Protector Group Agreement, pursuant to which, among other things, the original
Protector Group Agreement was terminated retroactively, effective as of September 29, 2010. The
new agreement also provides that the Company will (i) reimburse RouteCloud the sum of $75,000 for
certain transition expenses, (ii) assume responsibility for the ongoing development, marketing,
sale and support of Protector Products, (iii) offer employment or consulting arrangements to
certain RouteCloud personnel, and (iv) pay RouteCloud royalties on the sale of Protector Products.
Under the new agreement, royalties are to be paid at a 7% rate for the first 12 months after
revenues are first generated from the sale of Protector Products. The royalty rate will be reduced
by 1% per year in each of the four 12-month periods thereafter. After five years, the Company will
not owe any royalties on its sale of Protector Products (if any). The Company agreed to advance
RouteCloud $180,000 in royalties, which advance will be offset against royalties otherwise payable
to RouteCloud beginning in the second year following the first revenues from the sale of Protector
Products.
The Company incurred approximately $0.3 million of salary and consulting related costs related
to the internal development of Protector Products following the effective date of the revised
agreement with RouteCloud.
14. Subsequent Event
In March 2011, TASERs Board of Directors authorized a stock repurchase program to acquire up
to $12.5 million of the Companys outstanding common stock subject to stock market conditions and
corporate considerations. Through March 11, 2011, the Company repurchased approximately 700,000
shares at a weighted average cost of $4.09 per share and a total cost
of $2.9 million. The repurchase does not have a material impact on the number of common shares outstanding as of
December 31, 2010 or the calculation of basic and diluted loss per share for the quarter and year ended
December 31, 2010, had the repurchase been transacted before the end of the period.
60
Table of Contents
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
15. Selected Quarterly Financial Data
(unaudited)
Selected quarterly financial data for years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 follows:
Quarter Ended | ||||||||||||||||
Mar. 31, 2010 | Jun. 30, 2010 | Sep. 30, 2010 | Dec. 31, 2010 | |||||||||||||
Net sales |
$ | 23,843,901 | $ | 19,120,525 | $ | 21,084,081 | $ | 22,881,512 | ||||||||
Gross margin |
$ | 13,490,421 | $ | 9,630,710 | $ | 10,415,682 | $ | 11,830,062 | ||||||||
Net loss |
$ | (492,605 | ) | $ | (1,359,389 | ) | $ | (2,335,478 | ) | $ | (196,963 | ) | ||||
Basic net income (loss) per share |
$ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.02 | ) | $ | (0.04 | ) | $ | 0.00 | |||||
Diluted net income (loss) per share |
$ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.02 | ) | $ | (0.04 | ) | $ | 0.00 |
Quarter Ended | ||||||||||||||||
Mar. 31, 2009 | Jun. 30, 2009 | Sep. 30, 2009 | Dec. 31, 2009 | |||||||||||||
(a) | (a) | |||||||||||||||
Net sales |
$ | 24,604,780 | $ | 21,833,398 | $ | 23,310,457 | $ | 34,502,925 | ||||||||
Gross margin |
$ | 14,629,251 | $ | 13,738,728 | $ | 13,265,812 | $ | 21,768,618 | ||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | (467,759 | ) | $ | (723,404 | ) | $ | (3,176,016 | ) | $ | 4,366,073 | |||||
Basic net income (loss) per share |
$ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.05 | ) | $ | 0.07 | |||||
Diluted net income (loss) per share |
$ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.01 | ) | $ | (0.05 | ) | $ | 0.07 |
(a) | For the quarter ended September 30, 2009, the Company deferred $3.5 million of revenue from
X26 sales related to a trade-in program allowing agencies to upgrade to the TASER X3. The
deferred revenue of $3.5 million was subsequently recognized in the quarter ended December 31,
2009 either when the trade-in occurred or upon the expiration of the offer on December 31,
2009. |
61
Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Board of Directors and Stockholders of
TASER International, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of TASER International, Inc. (a
Delaware corporation) and subsidiary as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the
period ended December 31, 2010. Our audits of the basic financial statements included the
supplementary financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(2). These
financial statements and financial statement schedule are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial
statement schedule based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to
obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of TASER International, Inc. and subsidiary as of
December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of
the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion the related financial
statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole,
presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), TASER International, Inc.s internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on criteria established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) and
our report dated March 14, 2011, expressed an unqualified opinion.
/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
Phoenix, Arizona
March 14, 2011
62
Table of Contents
Item 9. | Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure |
None.
Item 9A. | Controls and Procedures |
Attached as exhibits to this Form 10-K are certifications of the Companys Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) and Chief Financial Officer (CFO), which are required in accordance with Rule
13a-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). This Controls and
Procedures section includes information concerning the controls and controls evaluation referred
to in the certifications. This section should be read in conjunction with the certifications and
the Grant Thornton LLP attestation report for a more complete understanding of the topics
presented.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we evaluated under the
supervision of our CEO and our CFO, the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Rules 13a-15(e) or 15d-15(e) of the Exchange Act). Based on this evaluation, our CEO and
our CFO have concluded that as of December 31, 2010 our disclosure controls and procedures are
effective to ensure that information we are required to disclose in reports that we file or submit
under the Exchange Act (i) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods
specified in Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms, and (ii) is accumulated and
communicated to our management, including our CEO and our CFO, as appropriate to allow timely
decisions regarding required disclosure.
Management Report On Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over
financial reporting to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of our financial
reporting and the preparation of consolidated financial statements for external purposes in
accordance with U.S. GAAP. Internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and
procedures that:
(i) | Pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable
detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions
and dispositions of the assets of the company; |
||
(ii) | Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are
recorded as necessary to permit preparation of
consolidated financial statements in accordance with
U.S. GAAP, and that receipts and expenditures of the
company are being made only in accordance with
authorizations of management and directors of the
company; and |
||
(iii) | Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or
timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or
disposition of the companys assets that could have a
material effect on the consolidated financial
statements. |
Management assessed our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, the
end of our fiscal year. Management based its assessment on criteria established in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. Managements assessment included evaluation of such elements as the design and
operating effectiveness of key financial reporting controls, process documentation, accounting
policies and our overall control environment. This assessment is supported by testing and
monitoring performed by our Internal Audit organization.
Based on our assessment, management has concluded that our internal control over financial
reporting was effective as of the end of the fiscal year to provide reasonable assurance regarding
the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of consolidated financial statements for
external reporting purposes in accordance with US GAAP. We reviewed the results of managements
assessment with the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors.
Our independent registered public accounting firm, Grant Thornton LLP, who also audited our
consolidated financial statements, assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting. Grant Thornton LLP has issued their attestation report, which is included
herein.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
During the three months ended December 31, 2010, there was no change in our internal control
over financial reporting identified in connection with the evaluation required by paragraph (d) of
Rule 13a-15 or Rule 15d-15 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
63
Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Board of Directors and Stockholders of
TASER International, Inc.
TASER International, Inc.
We have audited TASER International, Inc. (a Delaware Corporation) and subsidiarys internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on criteria established in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (COSO). TASER International Inc.s management is responsible for maintaining effective
internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management report on internal
control over financial reporting in Item 9A, Controls and Procedures. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on TASER International Inc.s internal control over financial reporting based on
our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was
maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal
control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and
evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk,
and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe
that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of consolidated
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles. A companys internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and
procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately
and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide
reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of
consolidated financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and
that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations
of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding
prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the companys
assets that could have a material effect on the consolidated financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or
detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are
subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that
the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, TASER International, Inc. maintained, in all material respects, effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on criteria established in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by COSO.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of TASER International, Inc. as of December
31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders equity, and
cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010, and our report dated
March 14, 2011, expressed an unqualified opinion.
/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP
Phoenix, Arizona
March 14, 2011
March 14, 2011
64
Table of Contents
Item 9B. | Other Information |
PART III
Item 10. | Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance |
The information required to be disclosed by this item is incorporated herein by reference to our
definitive proxy statement for the 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the 2011 Proxy Statement)
which proxy statement we expect to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days
after the end of our fiscal year ended December 31, 2010.
Item 11. | Executive Compensation |
The information required to be disclosed by this item is incorporated herein by reference to our
2011 Proxy Statement.
Item 12. | Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters |
The information required to be disclosed by this item is incorporated herein by reference to our
2011 Proxy Statement.
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table provides details of our equity compensation plans at December 31, 2010:
Number of | ||||||||||||||||
Number of | Securities | |||||||||||||||
Securities | to be Issued upon | Number of | ||||||||||||||
Authorized for | Exercise of | Weighted Average | Securities | |||||||||||||
Issuance | Outstanding | Exercise Price of | Remaining | |||||||||||||
Under the | Options, | Outstanding | Available for | |||||||||||||
Plan Category | Plan | Warrants or Rights | Options | Future Issuance | ||||||||||||
Equity
compensation plans
approved by
security holders |
24,352,500 | 7,507,286 | $ | 5.71 | 2,478,768 | |||||||||||
Equity compensation
plans not approved
by security holders |
| | $ | | | |||||||||||
Total |
24,352,500 | 7,507,286 | $ | 5.71 | 2,478,768 | |||||||||||
Refer to note 11(c) to the consolidated financial statements in Part II, Item 8 of this annual
report for more information on the Companys equity compensation plans.
Item 13. | Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence |
The information required to be disclosed by this item is incorporated herein by reference to our
2011 Proxy Statement.
Item 14. | Principal Accounting Fees and Services |
The information required to be disclosed by this item is incorporated by reference to our 2011
Proxy Statement.
PART IV
Item 15. | Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules |
(a) | The following documents are filed as part of this report: |
|
1. | Consolidated financial statements: |
|
All consolidated financial statements as set forth under Part II, Item 8 of this report. |
||
2. | Supplementary Financial Statement Schedules: |
|
Schedule II Valuation and Qualifying Accounts |
Other schedules have not been included because they are not applicable or because the information
is included elsewhere in this report.
65
Table of Contents
3. Exhibits:
Exhibit | ||||
Number | Description | |||
3.1 | Certificate of Incorporation, as amended (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2,
effective May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
|||
3.2 | Bylaws, as amended (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2, effective May 11, 2001
(Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
|||
3.3 | Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation dated September 1, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3 to
the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
|||
4.1 | Form of Common Stock Certificate (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2, effective
May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
|||
10.1 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Patrick W. Smith, dated July 1, 1998 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to
Registration Statement on Form SB-2 effective May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.2 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Thomas P. Smith, dated November 15, 2000 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to
Registration Statement on Form SB-2 effective May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.3 | * | Form of Indemnification Agreement between the Company and its directors (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to
Registration Statement on Form SB-2 effective May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.4 | * | Form of Indemnification Agreement between the Company and its officers (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to
Registration Statement on Form SB-2 effective May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.5 | * | 1999 Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2, effective May 11,
2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.6 | * | 2001 Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2, effective May 11,
2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.7 | Form of Sales Representative Agreement with respect to services by and between the Company and Sales Representatives
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 18, 2002) |
|||
10.8 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Douglas E. Klint, dated December 15, 2002 (incorporated by referenced to Exhibit 10.17 to
the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 14, 2003) |
||
10.9 | Credit Agreement dated June 22, 2004, between the Company and Bank One (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to the
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
|||
10.10 | Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of October 31, 2006 between the Company and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.17 to Form 8-K, filed November 6, 2006) |
|||
10.11 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Daniel Behrendt, dated April 28, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14 to the
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
||
10.12 | * | 2004 Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
||
10.13 | * | 2004 Outside Director Stock Option Plan, as amended (incorporated by reference to exhibit 10.16 to the Annual Report on Form
10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
||
10.14 | 2009 Stock Incentive Plan. (incorporated by reference to Appendix A to the Companys 2009 Proxy Statement, filed April 15, 2009) |
|||
10.15 | Agreement with Automation Tooling Systems Inc. for purchase of equipment (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 to the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed August 9, 2007) |
|||
10.16 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Steven Mercier, dated February 11, 2008 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 to the
Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed February 29, 2008) |
||
10.17 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Jas Dhillon, dated August 1, 2008 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 to the Annual
Report on Form 10-K, filed March 16, 2009) |
||
10.18 | Agreement with William D. Kennedy, WDK Enterprises, LLC and RouteCloud, LLC, dated November 2, 2010 (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed November 8, 2010) |
|||
14.1 | Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, as adopted by the Companys Board of Directors (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 14.1
to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
|||
21.1 | List of Subsidiaries |
|||
23.1 | Consent of Grant Thornton, LLP, independent registered public accounting firm |
|||
31.1 | Principal Executive Officer Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a) |
|||
31.2 | Principal Financial Officer Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a) |
|||
32.0 | Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
* | Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement |
66
Table of Contents
SIGNATURES
In accordance with the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report on Form 10-K to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly
authorized.
TASER INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Date: March 14, 2011
By: | /s/ PATRICK W. SMITH | |||
Chief Executive Officer |
Date: March 14, 2011
By: | /s/ DANIEL M. BEHRENDT | |||
Chief Financial Officer | ||||
(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears below constitutes and
appoints Patrick W. Smith his or her true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of
substitution and resubstitution, for him or her and in his or her name, place and stead, in any and
all capacities, to sign any and all amendments to this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and to file the
same, with all exhibits thereto and other documents in connection therewith the Securities and
Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent full power and authority to do
and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the
premises, as fully and to all intents and purposes as he or she might or could do in person hereby
ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact and agent, or his substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.
In accordance with the Exchange Act, this report has been signed by the following persons on behalf
of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Date | ||||
/s/ PATRICK W. SMITH
|
Director | March 14, 2011 | ||
/s/ THOMAS P. SMITH
|
Director | March 14, 2011 | ||
/s/ MATTHEW R. MCBRADY
|
Director | March 14, 2011 | ||
Matthew R. McBrady |
||||
/s/ HADI PARTOVI
|
Director | March 14, 2011 | ||
Hadi Partovi |
||||
/s/ JUDY MARTZ
|
Director | March 14, 2011 | ||
Judy Martz |
||||
/s/ MARK W. KROLL
|
Director | March 14, 2011 | ||
Mark W. Kroll |
||||
/s/ MICHAEL GARNREITER
|
Director | March 14, 2011 | ||
Michael Garnreiter |
||||
/s/ JOHN S. CALDWELL
|
Director | March 14, 2011 | ||
John S. Caldwell |
||||
/s/ RICHARD H. CARMONA
|
Director | March 14, 2011 | ||
Richard H. Carmona |
67
Table of Contents
SCHEDULE II VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
Balance at | Charged to | Charged to | Balance | |||||||||||||||||
beginning | costs and | other | at end of | |||||||||||||||||
Description | of period | expenses | accounts | Deductions | period | |||||||||||||||
Allowance for doubtful accounts |
||||||||||||||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2010 |
$ | 200,000 | $ | 48,903 | $ | $ | (48,903 | ) | $ | 200,000 | ||||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2009 |
$ | 200,000 | $ | 82,251 | $ | $ | (82,251 | ) | $ | 200,000 | ||||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2008 |
$ | 189,977 | $ | 78,010 | $ | $ | (67,987 | ) | $ | 200,000 | ||||||||||
Allowance for excess and obsolete inventory |
||||||||||||||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2010 |
$ | 474,074 | $ | 1,278,284 | $ | (129,900 | ) | $ | (1,271,794 | ) | $ | 350,664 | ||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2009 |
$ | 129,900 | $ | 821,983 | $ | | $ | (477,809 | ) | $ | 474,074 | |||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2008 |
$ | 320,555 | $ | 640,655 | $ | | $ | (831,310 | ) | $ | 129,900 | |||||||||
Warranty Reserve |
||||||||||||||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2010 |
$ | 369,311 | $ | 843,268 | $ | $ | (566,466 | ) | $ | 646,113 | ||||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2009 |
$ | 615,031 | $ | 92,278 | $ | | $ | (337,998 | ) | $ | 369,311 | |||||||||
Year ended December 31, 2008 |
$ | 919,254 | $ | 368,521 | $ | | $ | (672,744 | ) | $ | 615,031 | |||||||||
68
Table of Contents
Exhibit | ||||
Number | Description | |||
3.1 | Certificate of Incorporation, as amended (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2,
effective May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
|||
3.2 | Bylaws, as amended (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2, effective May 11, 2001
(Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
|||
3.3 | Certificate of Amendment to Certificate of Incorporation dated September 1, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.3 to
the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
|||
4.1 | Form of Common Stock Certificate (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2, effective
May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
|||
10.1 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Patrick W. Smith, dated July 1, 1998 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to
Registration Statement on Form SB-2 effective May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.2 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Thomas P. Smith, dated November 15, 2000 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to
Registration Statement on Form SB-2 effective May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.3 | * | Form of Indemnification Agreement between the Company and its directors (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to
Registration Statement on Form SB-2 effective May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.4 | * | Form of Indemnification Agreement between the Company and its officers (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to
Registration Statement on Form SB-2 effective May 11, 2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.5 | * | 1999 Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2, effective May 11,
2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.6 | * | 2001 Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to Registration Statement on Form SB-2, effective May 11,
2001 (Registration No. 333-55658), as amended) |
||
10.7 | Form of Sales Representative Agreement with respect to services by and between the Company and Sales Representatives
(incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 18, 2002) |
|||
10.8 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Douglas E. Klint, dated December 15, 2002 (incorporated by referenced to Exhibit 10.17 to
the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 14, 2003) |
||
10.9 | Credit Agreement dated June 22, 2004, between the Company and Bank One (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to the
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
|||
10.10 | Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of October 31, 2006 between the Company and JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.17 to Form 8-K, filed November 6, 2006) |
|||
10.11 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Daniel Behrendt, dated April 28, 2004 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14 to the
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
||
10.12 | * | 2004 Stock Option Plan (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
||
10.13 | * | 2004 Outside Director Stock Option Plan, as amended (incorporated by reference to exhibit 10.16 to the Annual Report on Form
10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
||
10.14 | 2009 Stock Incentive Plan. (incorporated by reference to Appendix A to the Companys 2009 Proxy Statement, filed April 15, 2009) |
|||
10.15 | Agreement with Automation Tooling Systems Inc. for purchase of equipment (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 to the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed August 9, 2007) |
|||
10.16 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Steven Mercier, dated February 11, 2008 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 to the
Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed February 29, 2008) |
||
10.17 | * | Executive Employment Agreement with Jas Dhillon, dated August 1, 2008 (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 to the Annual
Report on Form 10-K, filed March 16, 2009) |
||
10.18 | Agreement with William D. Kennedy, WDK Enterprises, LLC and RouteCloud, LLC, dated November 2, 2010 (incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, filed November 8, 2010) |
|||
14.1 | Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, as adopted by the Companys Board of Directors (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 14.1
to the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB, filed March 31, 2005) |
|||
21.1 | List of Subsidiaries |
|||
23.1 | Consent of Grant Thornton, LLP, independent registered public accounting firm |
|||
31.1 | Principal Executive Officer Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a) |
|||
31.2 | Principal Financial Officer Certification pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) or Rule 15d-14(a) |
|||
32.0 | Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
* | Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement |
69