CLEARONE INC - Annual Report: 2005 (Form 10-K)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
(Mark
One)
x ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
For
the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2005
OR
¨ TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934
For
the
transition period from ________ to ________
Commission
file number 0-17219
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
(Exact
name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Utah
|
87-0398877
|
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
incorporation
or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer
Identification
No.)
|
1825
Research Way
Salt
Lake City, Utah 84119
(Address
of principal executive offices, including zip code)
(801)
975-7200
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code)
Securities
registered under Section 12(b) of the Act: None
Securities
registered under Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Stock, $0.001 par
value
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined
in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes
¨ No
x
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant
to
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes
¨ No
x
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to
be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during
the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements
for
the past 90 days. Yes
¨ No
x
Indicate
by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the
best
of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of the Form 10-K or any amendment to
this
Form 10-K. ¨
1
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated
filer” and larger accelerated filer in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check
one):
Larger
Accelerated Filer ¨ Accelerated
Filer ¨ Non-Accelerated
Filer x
Indicate
by check mark whether the issuer is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2
of
the Securities Act.
Yes
¨ No
x
State
the
aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by
non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity
was
last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of
the
last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal
quarter. The aggregate market value of the 10,415,962 shares of voting common
stock held by non-affiliates was approximately $24,894,000 at December 31,
2005,
based on the $2.39 closing price for the Company’s common stock on the Pink
Sheets on such date.
APPLICABLE
ONLY TO REGISTRANTS INVOLVED IN BANKRUPTCY
PROCEEDINGS
DURING THE PRECEDING FIVE YEARS
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant has filed all documents and reports
required to be filed by Section 12, 13, or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act
of 1934 subsequent to the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed
by a
court. Yes
¨ No
¨
(APPLICABLE
ONLY TO CORPORATE REGISTRANTS)
Indicate
the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common
stock, as of the latest practicable date. The number of shares of ClearOne
common stock outstanding as of June 30, 2005 and February 28, 2006, were
11,264,233 and 12,184,727, respectively.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
List
hereunder the following documents if incorporated by reference and the part
of
the Form 10-K (e.g.,
Part I,
Part II, etc.) into which the document is incorporated: (1) any annual report
to
security holders; (2) any proxy or information statement; and (3) any prospectus
filed pursuant to Rule 424(b) or (c) under the Securities Act of 1933. The
listed documents should be clearly described for identification purposes
(e.g.,
annual
report to security holders for fiscal year ended December 24,
1980).
None.
2
DISCLOSURE
REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
This
report contains forward-looking statements as defined in the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements reflect our views with respect
to future events based upon information available to us at this time. These
forward-looking statements are subject to uncertainties and other factors
that
could cause actual results to differ materially from these statements.
Forward-looking statements are typically identified by the use of the words
“believe,” “may,” “could,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,”
“project,” “propose,” “plan,” “intend,” and similar words and expressions.
Examples of forward-looking statements are statements that describe the proposed
development, manufacturing, and sale of our products; statements that describe
our results of operations, pricing trends, the markets for our products,
our
anticipated capital expenditures, our cost reduction and operational
restructuring initiatives, and regulatory developments; statements with regard
to the nature and extent of competition we may face in the future; statements
with respect to the sources of and need for future financing; and statements
with respect to future strategic plans, goals, and objectives. Forward-looking
statements are contained in this report under “Description of Business” included
in Item 1 of Part I, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations” and “Qualitative and Quantitative
Disclosures About Market Risk” included in Items 7 and 7A of Part II of this
Annual Report on Form 10-K. The forward-looking statements are based on present
circumstances and on our predictions respecting events that have not occurred,
that may not occur, or that may occur with different consequences and timing
than those now assumed or anticipated. Actual events or results may differ
materially from those discussed in the forward-looking statements as a result
of
various factors, including the risk factors discussed in this report under
the
caption “Description of Business: Risk Factors.” These cautionary statements are
intended to be applicable to all related forward-looking statements wherever
they appear in this report. The cautionary statements contained or referred
to
in this report should also be considered in connection with any subsequent
written or oral forward-looking statements that may be issued by us or persons
acting on our behalf. Any forward-looking statements are made only as of
the
date of this report and ClearOne assumes no obligation to update forward-looking
statements to reflect subsequent events or circumstances.
CAUTIONARY
STATEMENT REGARDING THE FILING DATE OF THIS REPORT AND THE ANTICIPATED FUTURE
FILINGS OF ADDITIONAL PAST-DUE REPORTS
This
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005 is first
being filed in March 2006. The Company is in the process of preparing its
Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended September 30, 2005
and
December 31, 2005 and plans to file such reports at the earliest practicable
date. Shareholders and others are cautioned that the financial statements
included in this report are over eight months old and are not necessarily
indicative of the operating results that may be expected for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 2006. Shareholders and others should also be aware that the
staff of the Salt Lake District Office of the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”) intended to recommend to the Commission that administrative proceedings
be instituted to revoke the registration of the Company’s common stock based on
the Company’s failure to timely file annual and quarterly reports with the
Commission. The Company provided the staff with a so-called “Wells Submission”
setting forth its position with respect to the staff’s intended recommendation.
To date, the Commission has not instituted an administrative proceeding against
the Company; however, there can be no assurance that the Commission will
not
institute an administrative proceeding in the future or that the Company
would
prevail if an administrative proceeding were instituted.
PART I
References
in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to “ClearOne,” “we,” “us,” or “the Company”
refer to ClearOne Communications, Inc., a Utah corporation, and, unless the
context otherwise requires or is otherwise expressly stated, its
subsidiaries.
3
ITEM
1. DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS
Overview
We
are an
audio conferencing products company. We develop, manufacture, market, and
service a comprehensive line of audio conferencing products, which range
from
tabletop conferencing phones to professionally installed audio systems. We
also
manufacture and sell document and education cameras and conferencing furniture.
We have a strong history of product innovation and plan to continue to apply
our
expertise in audio engineering to developing innovative new products. We
believe
the performance and reliability of our high-quality audio products create
a
natural communication environment, which saves organizations of all sizes
time
and money by enabling more effective and efficient communication between
geographically separated businesses, employees, and customers.
Our
products are used by organizations of all sizes to accomplish effective group
communication. Our end-users range from some of the world’s largest and most
prestigious companies and institutions to small and medium-sized businesses,
educational institutions, and government organizations. We sell our products
to
these end-users primarily through a distribution network of independent
distributors who in turn sell our products to dealers, systems integrators,
and
value-added resellers. The Company also sells products on a limited basis
directly to dealers, systems integrators, value-added resellers, and end-users.
Our
Internet website address is www.clearone.com.
Our
annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports
on
Form 8-K, and amendments to such reports are available, free of charge, on
our
Internet website under “ClearOne Info—Investor Relations—SEC,” as soon as
reasonably practicable after we file electronically such material with, or
furnish it to, the SEC.
For
a
discussion of certain risks applicable to our business, results of operations,
financial position, and liquidity see the risk factors described in “Risk
Factors” below.
Significant
Events
The
SEC Action.
A
comprehensive review of our previously issued consolidated financial statements
was undertaken during fiscal 2003 after it was determined that the statements
were not prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles (“U.S. GAAP”). As a result of this review, we restated our previously
reported consolidated financial statements for the fiscal years ended June
30,
2002 and 2001 as well as our previously reported consolidated financial
statements for the first quarter of fiscal 2003 (“Previously Reported
Statements”).
ClearOne’s
Previously Reported Statements were the subject of a civil action filed by
the
SEC on January 15, 2003 against ClearOne and the persons then acting as its
chief executive and chief financial officers. The complaint generally alleged
that the defendants had engaged in a program of inflating ClearOne’s revenues,
net income, and accounts receivable by engaging in improper revenue recognition.
On December 4, 2003, we settled the SEC action by entering into a consent
decree
in which, without admitting or denying the allegations of the complaint,
we
consented to the entry of a permanent injunction prohibiting future securities
law violations. No fine or penalty was assessed against ClearOne as part
of the
settlement.
Securities
Delisted from NASDAQ Stock Market and Pink Sheets,
LLC. Our
common stock was delisted from the NASDAQ National Market System on April
21,
2003 and has been quoted on the National Quotation Bureau’s Pink Sheets on an
unsolicited basis since that time. On February 10, 2006, the Pink Sheets
blocked
publication of quotations for our common stock on its public website due
to our
failure to file current public information.
We
intend
to relist our common stock on NASDAQ Capital Market at the earliest practicable
date, once we meet all listing criteria. Certain key listing criteria include
the following:
4
· |
a
shareholders’ equity of $5.0 million, a market value of listed securities
of $50.0 million, or a net income from continuing operations (in
the
latest fiscal year or in two of the last three fiscal years) of
$750,000;
|
· |
a
market value of publicly held shares of $5.0 million;
|
· |
a
minimum bid price of $4.00 for 90-days prior to applying for listing;
|
· |
three
market makers;
|
· |
distribution
of an annual report;
|
· |
a
shareholders meeting; and
|
· |
other
corporate governance requirements.
|
The
Shareholder Class Action. On
June 30, 2003, a consolidated complaint was filed against ClearOne, eight
of our present or former officers and directors, and our former auditor,
Ernst
& Young, by a class consisting of purchasers of the Company’s common stock
during the period from April 17, 2001 through January 15, 2003. The allegations
in the complaint were essentially the same as those contained in the SEC
Action
described above. On December 4, 2003, we, on behalf of the Company and all
other
defendants with the exception of Ernst & Young, entered into a settlement
agreement with the class pursuant to which we agreed to pay the class $5.0
million and issue the class 1.2 million shares of our common stock. The cash
payment was made in two equal installments, the first on November 10, 2003
and
the second on January 14, 2005. On May 23, 2005, the court order was amended
to
provide that odd-lot numbers of shares (99 or fewer shares) would not be
issued
from the settlement fund and claimants who would otherwise be entitled to
receive 99 or fewer shares would be paid cash in lieu of such odd-lot numbers
of
shares. On September 29, 2005, we completed our obligations under the settlement
agreement by issuing a total of 1,148,494 shares of our common stock to the
plaintiff class, including 228,000 shares previously issued in November 2004,
and paying an aggregate of $126,705 in cash in lieu of shares to those members
of the class who would otherwise have been entitled to receive an odd-lot
number
of shares or who resided in states in which there was no exemption available
for
the issuance of shares. The cash payments were calculated on the basis of
$2.46
per share which was equal to the higher of (i) the closing price for our
common
stock as reported by the Pink Sheets on the business day prior to the date
the
shares were mailed or (ii) the average closing price over the five trading
days
prior to such mailing date.
Changes
to Management and Board of Directors. Since
January 2003, we have changed all members of our executive management team.
Three of our former directors are no longer serving in such positions and
we
have appointed two new directors, both of whom are independent directors
that
serve on our Audit Committee. In January 2003, Frances Flood, our former
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and Susie Strohm, our former Chief
Financial Officer, were placed on administrative leave and they subsequently
resigned from their positions. Michael Keough was then appointed as our Chief
Executive Officer, Gregory Rand was appointed as our President and Chief
Operating Officer, and George Claffey was appointed as our Chief Financial
Officer. All three subsequently resigned for personal reasons at various
times
during calendar 2004 and on July 8, 2004, Zeynep “Zee” Hakimoglu was
appointed as our President and Chief Executive Officer and Donald Frederick
was
appointed as our Chief Financial Officer. On November 15, 2004 Joseph Sorrentino
was appointed as our Vice-President of Worldwide Sales and Marketing. On
January
4, 2005, Werner Pekarek was appointed as our Vice-President of Operations.
Mr.
Frederick resigned on September 15, 2005 and on September 20, 2005, Craig
Peeples, our Corporate Controller, was appointed as our Interim Chief Financial
Officer. Additionally, on February 7, 2006, DeLonie Call, Vice-President
- Human
Resources, resigned in connection with the elimination of her position due
to a
restructuring of the executive team to match the change in size and structure
of
our organization.
Potential
SEC Administrative Action.
ClearOne
has been advised by the staff of the Salt Lake District Office of the SEC
that
the staff intended to recommend to the Commission that administrative
proceedings be instituted to revoke the registration of the Company’s common
stock based on the Company’s failure to timely file annual and quarterly reports
with the Commission. The Company provided the staff with a so-called “Wells
Submission” setting forth its position with respect to the staff’s intended
recommendation. To date, the Commission has not instituted an administrative
proceeding against the Company; however, there can be no assurance that the
Commission will not institute an administrative proceeding in the future
or that
the Company would prevail if an administrative proceeding were instituted.
5
Changes
in Type and Scope of Operations
Acquisitions
of E.mergent, Inc. and OM Video.
During
fiscal 2002 and fiscal 2003, we entered the audiovisual integration services
business through the acquisitions of E.mergent, Inc. and Stechyson Electronics,
Ltd., doing business as OM Video (“OM Video”). Our management at that time
believed such acquisitions would complement our existing operations and our
core
competencies and allow us to acquire market share in the audiovisual integration
services industry. However, our entry into the services business was perceived
as a threat by our systems integrators and value-added resellers, since we
began
competing against many of them for sales. The acquisitions were not successful
and the remaining operations were sold in fiscal 2004 and fiscal 2005. As
discussed in more detail in Item 1. Description of Business. Acquisitions
and Dispositions,
we
recorded impairment charges related to such acquisitions in the aggregate
amount
of approximately $26.0 million in the fiscal 2003 consolidated financial
statements.
Sale
of our U.S. Audiovisual Integration Services. On
May 6,
2004, we sold certain assets of our U.S. audiovisual integration services
operations (a portion of E.mergent, Inc.) to M:Space, Inc. (“M:Space”) for no
cash compensation. M:Space is a privately held audiovisual integration services
company. In exchange for M:Space assuming obligations for completion of certain
customer contracts and satisfying maintenance contract obligations to existing
customers, we transferred to M:Space certain assets including inventory valued
at $573,000. The operations of the U.S. audiovisual integration services
have
been classified as discontinued operations in the consolidated financial
statements.
Sale
of Conferencing Services Business.
On July
1, 2004, we sold our conferencing services business segment to Clarinet,
Inc.,
an affiliate of American Teleconferencing Services, Ltd. doing business as
Premiere Conferencing (“Premiere”) for $21.3 million. Of the purchase price,
$1.0 million was placed into an 18-month Indemnity Escrow account and an
additional $300,000 was placed into a working capital escrow account. We
received the $300,000 working capital escrow funds approximately 90 days
after
the execution date of the contract. We received the $1.0 million in the
Indemnity Escrow account in January 2006. The conferencing services operations
have been classified as discontinued operations in the June 30, 2005
consolidated financial statements.
Sale
of OM Video.
On
March
4, 2005, we sold all of the issued and outstanding stock of our Canadian
subsidiary, ClearOne Communications of Canada, Inc. (“ClearOne Canada”) to
6351352 Canada Inc., a Canada corporation (the “OM Purchaser”). ClearOne Canada
owned all the issued and outstanding stock of Stechyson Electronics Ltd.,
which
conducts business under the name OM Video. We agreed to sell the stock of
ClearOne Canada for $200,000 in cash; a $1.3 million note receivable which
is
due over a 15-month period, with interest accruing on the unpaid balance
at the
rate of 5.3 percent per year; and contingent consideration ranging from 3
percent to 4 percent of related gross revenues over a five-year period. We
have
presented all OM Video activities in discontinued operations in the June
30,
2005 consolidated financial statements. In June 2005, we were advised that
the
OM Purchaser had settled an action brought by the former employer of certain
of
OM Purchaser’s owners and employees alleging violation of non-competition
agreements. The settlement reportedly involved a cash payment and an agreement
not to sell certain products for a period of one year. Through December 2005,
OM
Purchaser had made all payments required under the note; however, OM Purchaser
failed to make any subsequent, required payments under the note receivable.
We
are currently considering our collection options.
Following
the disposition of operations in the video conferencing technology and products
(which occurred prior to fiscal 2005), audiovisual integration services,
and
conferencing services businesses, we returned to our core competency of
developing, manufacturing, and marketing audio conferencing products, which
is
where we intend to keep our focus for the foreseeable future.
Business
Strategy
Our
goal
is to maintain our market leadership in the professional or installed segment
of
the audio conferencing systems market, while building market leadership in
the
tabletop conferencing space. In addition, we have created a new conferencing
category with the RAV platform and continue to develop additional new products
as we build what we believe to be the most complete audio conferencing product
line on the market. The principal components of our strategy to achieve this
goal are:
6
Provide
a superior conferencing experience
We
have
been developing audio technologies since 1981 and believe we have established
a
reputation for providing some of the highest quality group audio conferencing
solutions in the industry. Our proprietary audio signal processing technologies
have been the core of our professional conferencing products and are the
foundation for our new product development in other conferencing categories.
We
plan to build upon our reputation of being a market leader and continue to
provide the highest quality products and technologies to the customers and
markets we serve.
Offer
greater value to our customers
To
provide our customers with audio conferencing products that can offer high
value, we are focused on listening to our customers and delivering products
to
meet their needs. By offering high quality products that are designed to
solve
conferencing ease-of-use issues and are easy to install, configure, and
maintain, we believe we can provide greater value to our customers and enhance
business communications and decision-making. Specific feedback from our customer
and channel partners led to the development of the Converge 560 and 590
professional conferencing systems, which began shipping in November
2005.
Leverage
and extend ClearOne technology leadership and innovation
We
have
sharpened our focus on developing cutting edge audio conferencing products
and
are committed to incorporating the latest technologies into our new and existing
product lines. Key to this effort is adopting emerging technologies such
as
Voice over Internet Protocol (“VoIP”), wireless connectivity, the convergence of
voice and data networks, exploring new usage models for our premium audio
conferencing technology, and international standards based conferencing
products. As an example, in February 2006 we began shipping our first VoIP
tabletop conference phones called MAXAttach IP™ and MAX IP™, which are based on
the SIP signaling protocol.
Expand
and strengthen strong sales channels
We
have
made significant efforts to expand and strengthen strong domestic and
international sales channels through the addition of key distributors and
dealers that expand beyond our traditional audio-video (“AV”) channels that
carry our professional conferencing line. We plan to continue to add new
distribution partners, with specific emphasis on bolstering distribution
to the
Information Technology (“IT”), telephony channels, and PC reseller channels,
where we see opportunity for our MAX® tabletop audio conferencing products,
including our new VoIP MAX phones; our RAV™ audio conferencing systems; our
conferencing peripherals, including the AccuMic® product line; our new tabletop
controller; and other products currently in development.
Broaden
our product offerings
We
offer
a full suite of audio conferencing products, ranging from high-end,
professionally installed audio conferencing systems used in executive
boardrooms, courtrooms, and auditoriums, to premium conferencing systems,
to
tabletop conferencing phones used in conference rooms and offices, and to
personal conferencing devices. We plan to continue to broaden our product
offerings to meet the evolving needs of our customers, address changes in
the
markets we currently serve, and effectively target new markets for our products.
Develop
strategic partnerships
To
stay
on the leading edge of product development, we plan to continue to identify
partners with technology and expertise in areas strategic to our growth
objectives. We will also work to develop partnerships with leaders in markets
complimentary to conferencing who can benefit from our audio products and
technologies and through whom we can access new market growth opportunities.
Strengthen
existing customer relationships through dedicated support
We
have
developed outstanding technical and sales support teams that are dedicated
to
providing customers with the best available service and support. We believe
our
technical support is recognized as among the best in the industry and we
will
continue to invest in the necessary resources to ensure that our customers
have
access to the information and support they need to be successful in using
our
products.
7
Markets
and Products
We
currently conduct most of our operations in the audio conferencing products
industry. We also previously operated in the conferencing services segment
until
July 1, 2004 (fiscal 2005), when we sold our conferencing services business
to
Clarinet, Inc., an affiliated of American Teleconferencing Services, Ltd.,
doing
business as Premiere Conferencing (“Premiere”) and in the business services
segment until March 4, 2005 (fiscal 2005), when we sold the remaining operations
in that area to 6351352 Canada Inc. For additional financial information
about
our segments, see Note 24 to Consolidated Financial Statements, which are
included in this report.
Products
Segment
The
performance and reliability of our high-quality conferencing products enable
effective and efficient communication between geographically separated
businesses, employees, and customers. We offer a full range of audio
conferencing products, from high-end, professionally installed audio
conferencing systems used in executive boardrooms, courtrooms, classrooms,
and
auditoriums, to tabletop conference phones used in conference rooms and offices,
and to personal conferencing devices. Many of our products feature our
proprietary Distributed Echo Cancellation® and noise cancellation technologies
to enhance communication during a conference call by eliminating echo and
background noise. They may also feature proprietary audio processing
technologies such as adaptive modeling and first-microphone priority, which
combine to deliver clear, crisp, full-duplex audio. This enables natural
communication between distant conferencing participants similar to that of
being
in the same room.
We
believe the principal drivers of demand for audio conferencing products are:
the
increasing availability of easy-to-use audio conferencing equipment; the
improving voice quality of audio conferencing systems compared to telephone
handset speakerphones; and the trend of global, regional, and local corporate
expansion. Other factors that we expect to have a significant impact on the
demand for audio conferencing systems are the availability of a wider range
of
affordable audio conferencing products for small businesses and home offices;
the growth of distance learning and corporate training programs and the number
of teleworkers; the decrease in the amount of travel within most enterprises
for
routine meetings; and the transition to the Internet Protocol (“IP”) network
from the traditional public switched telephone network (“PSTN”). We expect these
growth factors to be offset by direct competition from high-end telephone
handset speakerphones and new competitors in the audio conferencing space,
the
technological volatility of IP-based products, and continued pressures on
enterprises to reduce spending.
Professional
Audio Conferencing Products
We
have
been developing high-end, professionally installed audio conferencing products
since 1991 and believe we have established strong brand recognition for these
products worldwide. Our professional audio conferencing products include
the
XAP® and PSR1212 product lines. The XAP® line includes our most powerful,
feature-rich products, with the latest advances in technology and functionality.
It has more processing power than our legacy Audio Perfect® products and
contains noise cancellation technology in addition to our Distributed Echo
Cancellation® technology found in the Audio Perfect® product line. The PSR1212
is a digital matrix mixer that provides advanced audio processing, microphone
mixing, and routing for local sound reinforcement.
The
XAP®
and PSR1212 products are comprehensive audio processing systems designed
to
excel in the most demanding acoustical environments and routing configurations.
These products are also used for integrating high-quality audio with video
and
web conferencing systems.
On
March
30, 2005, we formalized our decision to discontinue our Audio Perfect® product
line. The last orders for our Audio Perfect® products were received on June 30,
2005 and the last build of Audio Perfect® products was during the first quarter
of fiscal 2006. We will continue to inventory parts for warranty and warranty
repair service and will continue to service these products for a five-year
period based on a two-year warranty and three-year repair period based on
parts
availability.
In
November 2005, we introduced the Converge™ 560 and Converge™ 590 professional
conferencing systems. Our customers had asked for a professional audio solution
that was less expensive and would fit the budgetary requirements for a mid-range
conference room. The products are positioned between XAP and RAV, both in
terms
of functionality and price, and are a perfect fit for rooms requiring customized
microphone and speaker configurations (up to 9 microphones can be connected)
along with connectivity to video and web conferencing systems. The Converge
products also offer speech lift to amplify a presenter’s voice in the local
room.
8
In
February 2006, ClearOne announced the new Tabletop Controller for the XAP
platform. This affordable solution gives XAP users the ability to easily
start
and navigate an audio conference without the need for touch panel control
systems, which can be expensive, complex, or intimidating to users. The dial
pad
on the device resembles a telephone keypad for instant familiarity, and users
can dial a conference call as easily as dialing a telephone, with little
or no
training required. The Tabletop Controller can cost thousands less than
touch-screen panel control systems and its simplified setup for the
user-definable keys can save customers programming time and expense as well.
Along with its sleek, functional design, this latest offering from ClearOne
delivers what we believe to be the most cost-effective, attractive and
easy-to-use control solution for XAP systems on the market.
Premium
Conferencing Systems
In
June
2004, we announced our RAV™ audio conferencing system and we started shipping
the product in November 2004. RAV™ is a complete, out-of-the-box system that
includes an audio mixer, Bose® loudspeakers, microphones, and a wireless control
device. In February 2005, we introduced a wired control device as a part
of our
RAV™ audio conferencing system offering. The RAV™ product uniquely combines the
sound quality of a professionally installed audio system with the simplicity
of
a conference phone and can be easily connected to industry common rich-media
devices, such as video or web conferencing systems, to deliver enhanced audio
performance.
RAV™
offers many powerful audio processing technologies from our professional
audio
conferencing products without the need for professional installation and
programming. It features Distributed Echo Cancellation®, noise cancellation,
microphone gating, and a drag-and-drop graphical user interface for easy
system
setup, control, and management.
Tabletop
Conferencing Phones
In
December 2003, we began shipping our MAX® line of tabletop conferencing phones.
These phones incorporate the high-end echo cancellation, noise cancellation,
and
audio processing technologies found in our professional audio conferencing
products.
The
MAX®
product line is comprised of the MAX® Wireless, MAXAttach™ Wireless, MAXAttach™,
MAX® EX, MAXAttach IP™, and MAX IP™ tabletop conferencing phones. MAX Wireless
was one of the industry’s first wireless conferencing phone on the market.
Designed for use in executive offices or small conference rooms with multiple
participants, MAX Wireless can be moved from room to room within 150 feet
of its
base station. MAXAttach Wireless began shipping in May 2005 and is believed
to
be the industry’s first dual-phone, completely wireless solution. This system
gives customers tremendous flexibility in covering larger conference room
areas.
The
MAXAttach and MAX EX wired phones feature a unique capability - instead of
just
adding extension microphones for use in larger rooms, MAXAttach daisy-chains
up
to four complete phones together. This provides even distribution of
microphones, loudspeakers, and controls for better sound quality and improved
user access in medium to large conference rooms. In addition, all MAXAttach
wired versions can be separated and used as single phones in smaller conference
rooms.
Our
latest additions to the MAX family are the MAXAttach IP and MAX IP, ClearOne’s
first VoIP conference phones, which are based on the industry-standard SIP
signaling protocol. These phones feature the same ability to daisy-chain
up to
four phones together, providing outstanding room coverage that we believe
other
VoIP conference phones on the market cannot match.
9
Other
Products
We
complement our audio conferencing products with microphones, document and
education cameras, and conferencing-specific furniture. Our microphones are
designed to improve the audio quality in audio, video, and web conferencing
applications. They feature echo cancellation and audio processing technologies
and can be used with personal computers, video conferencing systems, or
installed audio conferencing systems. Our cameras can be used in professional
conferencing or educational settings. They make possible the presentation
of
materials and images such as full-color documents, 3-D objects and images
from a
variety of sources, including computers, microscopes, and multimedia devices.
Our wide selection of wood, metal, and laminate conferencing furniture features
audiovisual carts; plasma screen carts and pedestals; and video conferencing
carts, tables, cabinets, and podiums.
Marketing
and Sales
We
use a
two-tier distribution model, in which we primarily sell our products directly
to
a worldwide network of independent audiovisual, information technology, and
telecommunications distributors, who then sell our products to independent
systems integrators, dealers, and value-added resellers, who in turn work
directly with the end-users of our products on product fulfillment and
installation. We also sell our products on a limited basis directly to certain
dealers, systems integrators, and value-added resellers. In addition, we
regularly participate in conferencing forums, trade shows, and industry
promotions.
In
fiscal
2005, approximately $23.4 million, or 74.1 percent, of our total product
sales
were generated in the United States and product sales of approximately $8.2
million, or 25.9 percent, were generated outside the United States. Revenue
from
product customers outside of the United States accounted for approximately
25.9
percent of our total sales from continuing operations for fiscal 2005, 22.7
percent for fiscal 2004, and 32.3 percent for fiscal 2003. We sell our products
in more than 70 countries worldwide. We anticipate that the portion of our
total
revenue from international sales will continue to increase as we further
enhance
our focus on developing new products, establishing new channel partners,
strengthening our presence in key growth areas, and improving product
localization with country-specific product documentation and marketing
materials.
Distributors
We
sell
our products directly to approximately 70 distributors throughout the world.
Distributors buy our products at a discount from list price and resell them
on a
non-exclusive basis to independent systems integrators, dealers, and value-added
resellers. Our distributors maintain their own inventory and accounts receivable
and are required to provide technical and non-technical support for our products
to the next level of distribution participants. We work with our distributors
to
establish appropriate inventory stocking levels. We also work with our
distributors to maintain relationships with our existing systems integrators,
dealers, and value-added resellers and to establish new distribution participant
relationships.
Independent
Integrators and Resellers
Our
distributors sell our products worldwide to approximately 1,000 independent
systems integrators, telephony value-added resellers, IT value-added resellers
and PC resellers on a non-exclusive basis. While dealers, resellers, and
systems
integrators all sell our products directly to the end-users, systems integrators
typically add significant value to each sale by combining our products with
products from other manufacturers as part of an integrated system solution.
Dealers and value-added resellers usually buy our products in large volumes
and
may bundle our products with products from other manufacturers for resale
to the
end-user. We maintain close working ties in the field with our reseller partners
and offer them education and training on all of our products.
Trade
Shows and Industry Forums
We
regularly attend industry forums and exhibit our products at trade shows,
including Infocomm, National Systems Contractors Association (“NSCA”), National
Science Teachers Association (“NSTA”), and Audio Visual Innovations University
(“AVI University”), that focus on areas relevant to our business to ensure our
products remain highly visible to distributors and dealers and to keep abreast
of market trends.
10
Customers
We
do not
believe that any end-user accounted for more than 10 percent of our total
revenue during fiscal 2005, 2004, or 2003. In fiscal 2005, revenues in our
product segment included sales to three distributors that represented
approximately 63.2 percent of the segment’s revenues. (For additional financial
information about our segments or geographic areas, see Note 24 to Consolidated
Financial Statements, which is included in this report.) As discussed above,
these distributors facilitate product sales to a large number of resellers,
and
subsequently to their end-users, none of which is known to account for more
than
10 percent of our revenues from product sales. Nevertheless, the loss of
one or
more distributors could reduce revenues and have a material adverse effect
on
our business and results of operations. As of June 30, 2005, our shipped
orders
on which we had not recognized revenues were $5.1 million and our backlog
of
unshipped orders was $175,000.
Competition
The
conferencing products market is characterized by intense competition and
rapidly
evolving technology. We compete with businesses having substantially greater
financial, research and development, manufacturing, marketing, and other
resources. If we are not able to continually design, manufacture, and
successfully introduce new or enhanced products or services that are comparable
or superior to those provided by our competitors and at comparable or better
prices, we could experience pricing pressures and reduced sales, profit margins,
profits, and market share, each of which could have a materially adverse
effect
on our business.
We
have
no single competitor for all of our product offerings, but we compete with
various companies within each product category. We believe we compete
successfully as a result of the high quality of our products and technical
support services as well as the strength of our brand.
With
respect to our products, we believe the principal factors driving sales are
product design, quality, and functionality of products; establishment of
brand
name recognition; pricing; access to and penetration of distribution channels;
quality of customer support; and a significant customer base.
In
the
professional audio conferencing systems market, our main competitors include
Biamp Systems and Polycom, along with several other companies. According
to
industry sources, during the 2003, 2004, and 2005 calendar year, we had the
largest share of the installed segment of the conferencing systems market,
which
we target with our professional audio conferencing products. ClearOne
significantly contributed to the professional conferencing space with the
introduction of the Audio Perfect™ (“AP”) product line several years ago and we
believe we continue to enjoy a strong reputation with the AV integrators
and AV
consultants for our product features, audio quality, and technical
support.
We
believe we created a new audio conferencing category with the introduction
of
the RAV™ platform, which we have called premium conferencing. RAV is a unique
product with capabilities we do not believe can be found on any other competing
system.
In
the
tabletop conferencing space, our primary competitors are Polycom, Konftel,
Panasonic and a number of other smaller manufacturers. During the 2005 calendar
year, we significantly increased our position in the tabletop market. We
believe
our MAX products are more competitively priced than Polycom’s comparable
products, and we believe our unique ability to attach multiple phones together
for increased coverage has given us opportunities to solve customer problems
that our competition cannot currently solve.
Our
microphones compete with the products of Audio Technica, Global Media, Shure,
and others. In the markets for our document cameras, competitors include
Elmo,
Ken-a-Vision, Samsung, Sony, Wolfvision, and other manufacturers. Our
conferencing furniture products compete primarily with the products of Accuwood,
Comlink, and Video Furniture International.
In
each
of the markets in which we compete, most of our competitors may have access
to
greater financial, technical, manufacturing, and marketing resources, and
as a
result they could respond more quickly or effectively to new technologies
and
changes in customer preferences. No assurances can be given that we can continue
to compete effectively in the markets we serve.
11
Regulation
The
European Parliament has published a directive on the Restriction on Use of
Hazardous Substances Directive (the “RoHS Directive”), which restricts the use
of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment beginning
July 1, 2006. In order to comply with this directive, it has become necessary
to
re-design the majority of our product line and switch over to components
that do
not contain the restricted substances, such as lead, mercury, and cadmium.
This
process involves procurement of the new compliant components, engineering
effort
to integrate and test them, and re-submitting the products for emissions,
safety
and telephone line interface compliance testing and approval. This effort
has
consumed resources and time that would otherwise have been spent on new product
development, which will continue until the product line has been updated.
In
addition, because this has essentially become a worldwide issue for all
electronics manufacturers who wish to sell into the European market, we have
seen increased lead times for compliant components because of the increased
demand. This is an issue that is not unique to ClearOne.
The
European Parliament has also published a directive on Electronic and Electrical
Waste Management (the “WEEE Directive”), which makes producers of certain
electrical and electronic equipment financially responsible for collection,
reuse, recycling, treatment, and disposal of equipment placed on the European
Union market after August 13, 2005. We are currently compliant in terms of
the
labeling requirements, and have finalized the recycling processes with the
appropriate entities within Europe. According to the directive, distributors
of
our product are deemed producers and must comply with this directive by
contracting with a recycler for the recovery, recycling, and reuse of
product.
Seasonality
Our
audio
conferencing products revenue has historically been strongest during the
second
and fourth quarters. Our camera product line revenue is usually strongest
during
the third and fourth quarters. There can be no assurance that any historic
sales
patterns will continue and, as a result, sales for any prior quarter are
not
necessarily indicative of the sales to be expected in any future quarter.
Product
Development
We
are
committed to research and development and view our continued investment in
research and development as a key ingredient to our long-term business success.
Our research and development expenditures were approximately $5.3 million
in
fiscal 2005, $4.2 million in fiscal 2004, and $3.3 million in fiscal
2003.
Our
core
competencies in research and development include many audio technologies,
including telephone echo cancellation, acoustic echo cancellation, and noise
cancellation. Our ability to use digital signal processing technology to
perform
audio processing operations is also a core competency. Our research and
development efforts are supported by an internal computer-aided design team
that
creates electrical schematics, printed circuit board designs, mechanical
designs, industrial designs, and manufacturing documentation. We believe
the
technology developed through this interactive process is critical to the
performance of our products. We also believe that ongoing development of
our
core technological competencies is vital to maintaining and increasing future
sales of our products and to enhancing new and existing products.
Manufacturing
Prior
to
June 20, 2005, we manufactured and assembled most of our products in our
manufacturing facility located at our corporate headquarters in Salt Lake
City,
Utah. We subcontract the manufacture of our MAX product line to a third-party
contract manufacturer located in China. We manufacture our furniture product
line in our manufacturing facility located in Champlin, Minnesota.
12
On
June
20, 2005, we began transitioning the manufacturing of most of our products
to a
third-party manufacturer. On August 1, 2005, we entered into a Manufacturing
Agreement pursuant to which we agreed to outsource our Salt Lake City
manufacturing operations to this third-party manufacturer (“TPM”). The agreement
is for an initial term of three years, which shall automatically be extended
for
successive and additional terms of one year each unless terminated by either
party upon 120 days advance notice at any time after the second anniversary
of
the agreement. The agreement generally provides, among other things, that
TPM
shall: (i) furnish the necessary personnel, material, equipment, services,
and
facilities to be the exclusive manufacturer of substantially all the products
that were previously manufactured at our Salt Lake City, Utah manufacturing
facility and the non-exclusive manufacturer of a limited number of products,
provided that the total cost to ClearOne (including price, quality, logistic
cost, and terms and conditions of purchase) is competitive; (ii) provide
repair
service, warranty support, and proto-type services for new product introduction
on terms to be agreed upon by the parties; (iii) purchase certain items of
our
manufacturing equipment; (iv) lease certain other items of our manufacturing
equipment and have a one-year option to purchase such leased items; (v) have
the
right to lease our former manufacturing employees from a third-party employee
leasing company; and (vi) purchase the parts and materials on hand and in
transit at our cost for such items with the purchase price payable on a monthly
basis when and if such parts and materials are used by TPM. The parties also
entered into a one-year sublease for approximately 12,000 square feet of
manufacturing space located in our headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah,
which
sublease may be terminated by either party upon 90 days notice, which TPM
has
elected to terminate effective May 31, 2006. The agreement provides that
products shall be manufactured pursuant to purchase orders submitted by us
at
purchase prices to be agreed upon by the parties, subject to adjustment based
upon such factors as volume, long range forecasts, change orders, etc. We
also
granted TPM a right of first refusal to manufacture new products developed
by us
at a cost to ClearOne (including price, quality, logistic cost, and terms
and
conditions of purchase) that is competitive.
We
believe the long-term benefits from our manufacturing outsourcing strategy
include:
· |
Avoidance
of a significant investment in upgrading our manufacturing
infrastructure;
|
· |
Achievement
of a rapid International Standards Organization certification of
our
products by partnering with an outsource manufacturer that was
International Standards Organization
certified;
|
· |
Scale-ability
in our manufacturing process without major investment or major
restructuring costs; and
|
· |
Achievement
of future cost reductions on manufacturing costs and inventory
costs based
upon increased economies of scale in material and
labor.
|
For
risks
associated with our manufacturing strategy please see “Risk Factors” in Item
1.
Intellectual
Property and Other Proprietary Rights
We
believe that our success depends in part on our ability to protect our
proprietary rights. We rely on a combination of patent, copyright, trademark,
and trade secret laws and confidentiality procedures to protect our proprietary
rights. The laws of foreign countries may not protect our intellectual property
to the same degree as the laws of the United States.
We
generally require our employees, customers, and potential distribution
participants to enter into confidentiality and non-disclosure agreements
before
we disclose any confidential aspect of our technology, services, or business.
In
addition, our employees are routinely required to assign to us any proprietary
information, inventions, or other technology created during the term of their
employment with us. These precautions may not be sufficient to protect us
from
misappropriation or infringement of our intellectual property.
We
currently have several patents issued or pending that cover our conferencing
products and technologies. The expiration dates of issued patents range from
2009 to 2010. We hold registered trademarks for ClearOne, XAP, MAX, AccuMic,
Audio Perfect, Distributed Echo Cancellation, Gentner, and others. We have
also
filed for trademarks for RAV and others.
13
Employees
Employees
of as
|
||||
Feb.
28, 2006
|
June
30, 2005
|
June
30, 2004
|
June
30, 2003
|
|
Sales,
marketing, and
|
||||
customer
support
|
44
|
45
|
51
|
49
|
Product
development
|
47
|
43
|
41
|
20
|
Operations
support
|
19
|
20
|
40
|
40
|
Administration
|
15
|
18
|
29
|
30
|
U.S.
business services
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
29
|
Conferencing
services
|
0
|
0
|
76
|
61
|
OM
Video
|
0
|
0
|
27
|
34
|
Total
|
125
|
126
|
264
|
263
|
As
of
February 28, 2006, we had 125 employees, 121 of whom were employed on a
full-time basis, with 44 in sales, marketing, and customer support; 47 in
product development; 19 in operations support; and 15 in administration,
including finance. Of these employees, 97 were located in our Salt Lake City
office, 21 in other U.S. locations, five in the United Kingdom and two in
Asia.
None of our employees are subject to a collective bargaining agreement and
we
believe our relationship with our employees is good.
As
of
June 30, 2005, following the sale of our conferencing services business,
OM
Video, and the outsourcing of our Salt Lake City manufacturing operations,
we
had 126 employees, 124 of whom were employed on a full-time basis, with 45
in
sales, marketing, and customer support; 43 in product development; 20 in
operations support, and 18 in administration, including finance. Of these
employees, 94 were located in our Salt Lake City office, 25 in other U.S.
locations, five in the United Kingdom and two in Asia.
Acquisitions
and Dispositions
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2001, we completed the sale of the assets
of the
remote control portion of our RFM/Broadcast division to Burk Technology,
Inc.
During the fiscal year ended June 30,
2002, we
completed the acquisition of E.mergent, Inc., an audiovisual integration
services provider and manufacturer of cameras and conferencing furniture.
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003, we sold our
broadcast telephone interface products, including the digital hybrid and
TS-612
product lines, to Comrex Corporation
and completed the acquisition of Stechyson Electronics Ltd., doing business
as
OM Video, an audiovisual integration services company. During fiscal 2004,
we
sold our U.S. audiovisual integration services business to M:Space, Inc.
During
fiscal 2005, we sold our conferencing services segment to Premiere and we
sold
our Canadian audiovisual integration services business to 6351352 Canada
Inc.
The total consideration for each acquisition was based on negotiations between
ClearOne and the acquired company or its shareholders that took into account
a
number of factors of the business, including historical revenues, operating
history, products, intellectual property, and other factors. Each acquisition
was accounted for under the purchase method of accounting. Each acquisition
is
summarized below and is discussed in more detail in the footnotes to the
June
30, 2005 consolidated financial statements included in this report.
Sale
of Assets to Burk Technology.
On April
12, 2001, we sold the assets of the remote control portion of our RFM/Broadcast
division to Burk Technology, Inc. (“Burk”), a privately held developer and
manufacturer of broadcast facility control systems products, for $750,000
in
cash at closing, $1.8 million in the form of a seven-year promissory note,
with
interest at the rate of 9.0 percent per year, and up to $700,000 as a commission
over a period of up to seven years. We realized a pre-tax gain on the sale
of
$187,000 for fiscal 2005, $93,000 for fiscal 2004, and $318,000 for fiscal
2003.
As of June 30, 2005, $1.5 million of the promissory note remained
outstanding and we had received $20,000 in commissions.
On
August
22, 2005, we entered into a Mutual Release and Waiver Agreement with Burk
pursuant to which Burk paid us $1.3 million in full satisfaction of the
promissory note, which included a discount of $119,000. As part of the Mutual
Release and Waiver Agreement, we waived any right to future commission payments
from Burk and we granted mutual releases to one another with respect to claims
and liabilities. Accordingly, the total pre-tax gain on the sale was
approximately $2.4 million.
14
E.mergent
Acquisition. On
May
31, 2002, we completed our acquisition of E.mergent pursuant to the terms
of an
Agreement and Plan of Merger dated January 21, 2002 whereby we paid $7.3
million
of cash and issued 868,691 shares of common stock valued at $16.55 per share
to
former E.mergent stockholders.
In
addition to the shares of our common stock issued, we assumed all options
to
purchase E.mergent common stock that were vested and outstanding on the
acquisition date. These options were converted into rights to acquire a total
of
4,158 shares of our common stock at a weighted average exercise price of
$8.48
per share. A
value
of approximately $49,000 was assigned to these options using the Black-Scholes
option pricing model with the following assumptions: expected dividend yield
of
0 percent, risk-free interest rate of 2.9 percent, expected volatility of
81.8
percent, and an expected life of two years.
As
of the
acquisition date, we acquired tangible assets consisting of cash of $68,000,
accounts receivable of $2.2 million, inventory of $3.3 million, property
and
equipment of $475,000 and other assets of $1.3 million. We assumed liabilities
consisting of accounts payable of $1.3 million, line of credit borrowings
of
$484,000, unearned maintenance revenue of $873,000, accrued compensation
(other
than severance) and other accrued liabilities of $656,000. We incurred severance
costs of approximately $468,000 related to the termination of four E.mergent
executives and seven other E.mergent employees as a result of duplication
of
positions upon consummation of the acquisition. In June 2002, $52,000 was
paid
to such individuals. The severance accrual of $416,000 as of June 30, 2002
was
paid during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003.
With
the
assistance of a third-party valuation firm and after considering the facts
and
circumstances surrounding the acquisition, we recorded intangible assets
related
to customer relationships, patents, a non-compete agreement, and goodwill.
Amortization expense of $437,000 was recorded for customer relationships,
patents, and a non-compete agreement during fiscal 2003. Customer relationships
had estimated useful lives of 18 months to three years and patents had estimated
useful lives of fifteen years. The term of the non-compete agreement was
three
years. In accordance with SFAS No. 142, no amortization expense was recorded
for
goodwill.
Our
management, at the time, believed the E.mergent acquisition would complement
our
existing operations and that core competencies would allow us to acquire
market
share in the audiovisual integration industry. However, our entry into the
services business was perceived as a threat by our systems integrators and
value-added resellers, since we began competing against many of them for
sales.
In order to avoid this conflict and to maintain good relationships with our
systems integrators and value-added resellers, we decided to stop pursuing
new
services contracts in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended June 30,
2003
which was considered a triggering event for evaluation of impairment.
Ultimately, we exited the U.S. audiovisual integration market and subsequently
sold our U.S. audiovisual integration business to M:Space in May 2004. (See
Sale
of our U.S. Audiovisual Integration Services
below.)
Although we continue to sell camera and furniture products acquired from
E.mergent, our decision to exit the U.S. integration services market adversely
affected future cash flows. We determined that a triggering event occurred
in
the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. We performed an
impairment test and determined that an impairment loss on the integration
services-related E.mergent assets of approximately $12.5 million should be
recognized. We also determined that an impairment loss on other acquired
E.mergent assets of approximately $5.1 million should be recognized. The
U.S.
audiovisual integration business operations and related net assets are included
in discontinued operations in the accompanying June 30, 2005 consolidated
financial statements.
Sale
of Broadcast Telephone Interface Business to Comrex.
On
August 23, 2002, we entered into an agreement with Comrex Corporation
(“Comrex”), pursuant to which Comrex agreed to pay ClearOne $1.3 million in
exchange for certain inventory associated with our broadcast telephone interface
product line and the provision of a perpetual software license to use our
technology related to broadcast telephone interface products along with one
free
year of maintenance and support, and transition services for 90 days following
the effective date of the agreement. The transition services included training,
engineering assistance, consultation, and development services. We recognized
approximately $0, $130,000, and $1.1 million in business services revenue
related to this transaction for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004,
and
2003.
We
also
entered into a manufacturing agreement to continue to manufacture additional
product for Comrex until August 2003 on a when-and-if needed basis. Comrex
agreed to pay the Company for any additional product on a per item basis
of cost
plus 30 percent. During the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003,
we
have recognized $0, $387,000 and $783,000, respectively, in product revenue
related to the manufacture of additional product from Comrex.
15
OM
Video Acquisition. On
August
27, 2002, we purchased all of the outstanding shares of Stechyson Electronics
Ltd., doing business as OM Video, headquartered in Ottawa, Canada. Under
the
terms of the agreement, the shareholders of OM Video received $6.3 million
in
cash at closing. During the fiscal years ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, we
paid
an additional $500,000 of a potential $600,000 that was held back pending
the
continued accuracy of certain representations and warranties associated with
the
acquisition. During the second quarter of fiscal 2003, we also paid $750,000
of
a potential $800,000 earn-out provision. The earn-out provision was not
considered as part of the original purchase price allocation and was recorded
as
additional consideration and booked to goodwill. No further payment related
to
the holdback or contingent consideration will be paid. Accordingly, the total
cash payments associated with the acquisition were approximately $7.5
million.
As
of the
acquisition date, we acquired tangible assets consisting of cash of $193,000,
accounts receivable of $470,000, inventory of $122,000, property and equipment
of $145,000, and prepaid expenses of $6,000. We assumed liabilities consisting
primarily of accrued liabilities of $378,000 and accrued tax liabilities
of
$221,000. We obtained a non-compete agreement with a term of two years from
a
former owner of OM Video.
Our
management, at the time, believed the OM Video acquisition would complement
the
Company’s existing operations and that core competencies would allow the Company
to acquire market share in the audiovisual integration industry. However,
our
entry into the services business was perceived as a threat by our systems
integrators and value-added resellers, since we began competing against many
of
them for sales. In order to avoid this conflict and to maintain good
relationships with our systems integrators and value-added resellers, we
deemphasized the audiovisual integration market serving the Ottawa Canada
region
beginning in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. This
decision was considered a triggering event for evaluation of impairment.
On June
30, 2003, we performed an impairment test and determined that an impairment
loss
on the OM Video assets of approximately $8.4 million should be recognized.
On
March 4, 2005, we sold all of our Canadian audiovisual integration business
to
6351352 Canada, Inc. (See Sale
of OM Video - Canadian Audiovisual Integration Services
below.)
Sale
of our U.S. Audiovisual Integration Services. On
May 6,
2004, we sold certain assets of our U.S. audiovisual integration services
operations to M:Space, Inc. (“M:Space”) for no cash compensation. M:Space is a
privately held audiovisual integration services company. In exchange for
M:Space
assuming obligations for completion of certain customer contracts, and
satisfying maintenance contract obligations to existing customers, we
transferred to M:Space certain assets including inventory valued at $573,000.
We
recognized a pre-tax loss on the sale of $276,000 during the fiscal year
ended
June 30, 2004. We continue to sell camera and furniture products acquired
through the E.mergent acquisition.
Sale
of our Conferencing Services. In
April
2004, our Board of Directors appointed a committee to explore opportunities
to
sell the conferencing services business component. We decided to sell this
component primarily because of decreasing margins and investments in equipment
that we believed would have been required in the near future. On July 1,
2004,
we sold our conferencing services business segment to Premiere. Consideration
for the sale consisted of $21.3 million in cash. Of the purchase price $300,000
was placed into a working capital escrow account and an addition $1.0 million
was placed into an 18-month Indemnity Escrow account. We received the $300,000
working capital escrow funds approximately 90 days after the execution date
of
the contract. We received the $1.0 million in the Indemnity Escrow account
in
January 2006. Additionally, $1.4 million of the proceeds was utilized to
pay off
equipment leases pertaining to assets being conveyed to Premiere. We realized
a
pre-tax gain on the sale of $17.4 million during the fiscal year ended June
30,
2005.
Sale
of OM Video - Canadian Audiovisual Integration
Services.
On
March
4, 2005, we sold all of the issued and outstanding stock of our Canadian
subsidiary, ClearOne Canada to 6351352 Canada Inc., a Canada corporation.
ClearOne Canada owned all the issued and outstanding stock of Stechyson
Electronics, Ltd., which conducts business under the name OM Video. We agreed
to
sell the stock of ClearOne Canada for $200,000 in cash; a $1.3 million note
payable over a 15-month period, with interest accruing on the unpaid balance
at
the rate of 5.3 percent per year; and contingent consideration ranging from
3.0
percent to 4.0 percent of related gross revenues over a five-year period.
In
June 2005, we were advised that the OM Purchaser had settled an action brought
by the former employer of certain of OM Purchaser’s owners and employees
alleging violation of non-competition agreements. The settlement reportedly
involved a cash payment and an agreement not to sell certain products for
a
period of one year. Based on an analysis of the facts and circumstances that
existed on March 4, 2005, and considering the guidance from Topic 5U of the
SEC
Rules and Regulations, “Gain Recognition on the Sale of a Business or Operating
Assets to a Highly Leveraged Entity,” the gain is being recognized as cash is
collected. The Company realized a pre-tax gain on the sale of $295 for the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2005. As of December 31, 2005, all payments had
been
received and $854,000 of the promissory note remained outstanding; however,
OM
Purchaser failed to make any subsequent, required payments on the note
receivable. We are currently considering our collection options.
16
ITEM
1A. RISK FACTORS
Investors
should carefully consider the risks described below. The risks described
below
are not the only ones we face, and there are risks that we are not presently
aware of or that we currently believe are immaterial that may also impair
our
business operations. Any of these risks could harm our business. The trading
price of our common stock could decline significantly due to any of these
risks,
and investors may lose all or part of their investment. In assessing these
risks, investors should also refer to the other information contained or
incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our
June
30, 2005 consolidated financial statements and related notes.
Risks
Relating to Our Business
We
face intense competition in all of the markets for our products and services;
our operating results will be adversely affected if we cannot compete
effectively against other companies.
As
described in more detail in the section entitled “Competition,” the markets for
our products and services are characterized by intense competition and pricing
pressures and rapid technological change. We compete with businesses having
substantially greater financial, research and development, manufacturing,
marketing, and other resources. If we are not able to continually design,
manufacture, and successfully introduce new or enhanced products or services
that are comparable or superior to those provided by our competitors and
at
comparable or better prices, we could experience pricing pressures and reduced
sales, profit margins, profits, and market share, each of which could have
a
materially adverse effect on our business.
Difficulties
in estimating customer demand in our products segment could harm our profit
margins.
Orders
from our distributors and other distribution participants are based on demand
from end-users. Prospective end-user demand is difficult to measure. This
means
that our revenues in any fiscal quarter could be adversely impacted by low
end-user demand, which could in turn negatively affect orders we receive
from
distributors and dealers. Our expectations for both short- and long-term
future
net revenues are based on our own estimates of future demand.
Revenues
for any particular time period are difficult to predict with any degree of
certainty. We usually ship products within a short time after we receive
an
order; so consequently, unshipped backlog has not been a good indicator of
future revenues. We believe that the current level of backlog will fluctuate
dependent in part on our ability to forecast revenue mix and to plan our
manufacturing accordingly. A significant portion of our customers’ orders are
received in the last month of the quarter. We budget the amount of our expenses
based on our revenue estimates. If our estimates of sales are not accurate
and
we experience unforeseen variability in our revenues and operating results,
we
may be unable to adjust our expense levels accordingly and our profit margins
will be adversely affected.
Our
profitability may be adversely affected by our continuing dependence on our
distribution channels.
We
market
our products primarily through a network of distributors who in turn sell
our
products to systems integrators, dealers, and value-added resellers. All
of our
agreements with such distributors and other distribution participants are
non-exclusive, terminable at will by either party and generally short-term.
No
assurances can be given that any or all such distributors or other distribution
participants will continue their relationship with us. Distributors and to
a
lesser extent systems integrators, dealers, and value-added resellers cannot
easily be replaced and the loss of revenues and our inability to reduce expenses
to compensate for the loss of revenues could adversely affect our net revenues
and profit margins.
Although
we rely on our distribution channels to sell our products, our distributors
and
other distribution participants are not obligated to devote any specified
amount
of time, resources, or efforts to the marketing of our products or to sell
a
specified number of our products. There are no prohibitions on distributors
or
other resellers offering products that are competitive with our products
and
most do offer competitive products. The support of our products by distributors
and other distribution participants may depend on the competitive strength
of
our products and the price incentives we offer for their support. If our
distributors and other distribution participants are not committed to our
products, our revenues and profit margins may be adversely affected.
17
We
depend on an outsourced manufacturing strategy.
In
August
2005, we entered into a manufacturing agreement with a domestic manufacturing
services provider, to be the exclusive manufacturer of substantially all
the
products that were previously manufactured at our Salt Lake City, Utah
manufacturing facility. This manufacturer is currently the primary manufacturer
of substantially all of our products, except our MAX® product line and our
furniture product line, and if this manufacturer experiences difficulties
in
obtaining sufficient supplies of components, component prices become
unreasonable, an interruption in its operations, or otherwise suffers capacity
constraints, we would experience a delay in shipping these products which
would
have a negative impact on our revenues. Currently, we have no second source
of
manufacturing for substantially all of our products.
We
have
an agreement with an international manufacturer for the manufacture of our
MAX®
product line. We use a facility in China. Should there be any disruption
in
services due to natural disaster, economic or political difficulties in China,
quarantines or other restrictions associated with infectious diseases, or
other
similar events, or any other reason, such disruption would have a material
adverse effect on our business. A delay in shipping these products due to
an
interruption in the manufacturer’s operations would have a negative impact on
our revenues. Operating in the international environment exposes us to certain
inherent risks, including unexpected changes in regulatory requirements and
tariffs, and potentially adverse tax consequences, which could materially
affect
our results of operations.
Product
obsolescence could harm demand for our products and could adversely affect
our
revenues and our results of operations.
Our
industry is subject to rapid and frequent technological innovations that
could
render existing technologies in our products obsolete and thereby decrease
market demand for such products. If any of our products become slow-moving
or
obsolete and the recorded value of our inventory is greater than its market
value, we will be required to write-down the value of our inventory to its
fair
market value, which would adversely affect our results of operations. In
limited
circumstances, we are required to purchase components that our outsourced
manufacturers use to produce and assemble our products. Should technological
innovations render these components obsolete, we will be required to write-down
the value of this inventory, which could adversely affect our results of
operations.
Product
development delays or defects could harm our competitive position and reduce
our
revenues.
We
have,
in the past, and may again experience, technical difficulties and delays
with
the development and introduction of new products. Many of the products we
develop contain sophisticated and complicated components and utilize
manufacturing techniques involving new technologies. Potential difficulties
in
the development process that could be experienced by us include difficulty
in:
· |
meeting
required specifications and regulatory standards;
|
· |
meeting
market expectations for
performance;
|
· |
hiring
and keeping a sufficient number of skilled developers;
|
· |
having
the ability to identify problems or product defects in the development
cycle; and
|
· |
achieving
necessary manufacturing efficiencies.
|
Once
new
products reach the market, they may have defects, which could adversely affect
market acceptance of these products and our reputation. If we are not able
to
manage and minimize such potential difficulties, our business could be
negatively affected.
18
If
we
are unable to protect our intellectual property rights or have insufficient
proprietary rights, our business would be materially impaired.
We
currently rely primarily on a combination of trade secrets, copyrights,
trademarks, patents, and nondisclosure agreements to establish and protect
our
proprietary rights in our products. No assurances can be given that others
will
not independently develop similar technologies, or duplicate or design around
aspects of our technology. In addition, we cannot assure that any patent
or
registered trademark owned by us will not be invalidated, circumvented or
challenged or that the rights granted thereunder will provide competitive
advantages to us. Litigation may be necessary to enforce our intellectual
property rights. We believe our products and other proprietary rights do
not
infringe upon any proprietary rights of third parties; however, we cannot
assure
that third parties will not assert infringement claims in the future. Our
industry is characterized by vigorous protection of intellectual property
rights. Such claims and litigation are expensive and could divert management’s
attention, regardless of their merit. In the event of a claim, we might be
required to license third-party technology or redesign our products, which
may
not be possible or economically feasible.
We
currently hold only a limited number of patents. To the extent that we have
patentable technology for which we have not filed patent applications, others
may be able to use such technology or even gain priority over us by patenting
such technology themselves.
International
sales account for a significant portion of our net revenue and risks inherent
in
international sales could harm our business.
International
sales represent a significant portion of our total product sales. For example,
international sales represented 25.9 percent of our total product sales for
fiscal 2005, 22.7 percent for fiscal 2004, and 32.3 percent for fiscal 2003.
We
anticipate that the portion of our total product revenue from international
sales will continue to increase as we further enhance our focus on developing
new products, establishing new distribution partners, strengthening our presence
in key growth areas, and improving product localization with country-specific
product documentation and marketing materials. Our international business
is
subject to the financial and operating risks of conducting business
internationally, including:
· |
unexpected
changes in, or the imposition of, additional legislative or regulatory
requirements;
|
· |
fluctuating
exchange rates;
|
· |
tariffs
and other barriers;
|
· |
difficulties
in staffing and managing foreign sales operations;
|
· |
import
and export restrictions;
|
· |
greater
difficulties in accounts receivable collection and longer payment
cycles;
|
· |
potentially
adverse tax consequences;
|
· |
potential
hostilities and changes in diplomatic and trade
relationships;
|
· |
disruption
in services due to natural disaster, economic or political difficulties,
quarantines, or other restrictions associated with infectious
diseases.
|
Our
sales
in the international market are denominated in U.S. Dollars, with the exception
of sales through our wholly owned subsidiary, OM Video, whose sales were
denominated in Canadian Dollars until March 4, 2005, when the subsidiary
was
sold to a third party. Consolidation of OM Video’s financial statements with
ours, under U.S. GAAP, required remeasurement of the amounts stated in OM
Video’s financial statements to U.S. Dollars, which was subject to exchange rate
fluctuations. We did not undertake hedging activities that might have protected
us against such risks.
19
We
may not be able to hire and retain highly skilled employees, which could
affect
our ability to compete effectively and may cause our revenue and profitability
to decline.
We
depend
on highly skilled technical personnel to research and develop, market, and
service new and existing products. To succeed, we must hire and retain employees
who are highly skilled in the rapidly changing communications and Internet
technologies. Individuals who have the skills and can perform the services
we
need to provide our products and services are in great demand. Because the
competition for qualified employees in our industry is intense, hiring and
retaining employees with the skills we need is both time-consuming and
expensive. We might not be able to hire enough skilled employees or retain
the
employees we do hire. Our inability to hire and retain employees with the
skills
we seek could hinder our ability to sell our existing products, systems,
or
services or to develop new products, systems, or services with a consequent
adverse effect on our business.
Our
reliance on third-party technology or license agreements.
We
have
licensing agreements with various suppliers for software and hardware
incorporated into our products. These third-party licenses may not continue
to
be available to us on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. The termination
or impairment of these licenses could result in delays of current product
shipments or delays or reductions in new product introductions until equivalent
designs could be developed, licensed, and integrated, if at all possible,
which
would have a material adverse effect on our business.
Our
sales depend to a certain extent on government funding and
regulation.
In
the
audio conferencing products market, the revenues generated from sales of
our
audio conferencing products for distance learning and courtroom facilities
are
dependent on government funding. In the event government funding for such
initiatives was reduced or became unavailable, our sales could be negatively
impacted. Additionally, many of our products are subject to governmental
regulations. New regulations could significantly impact sales in an adverse
manner.
Environmental
laws and regulations subject us to a number of risks and could result in
significant costs and impact on revenue
The
European Parliament has published a directive on the Restriction on Use of
Hazardous Substances Directive (the “RoHS Directive”), which restricts the use
of certain hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment beginning
July 1, 2006. In order to comply with this directive, it has become necessary
to
re-design the majority of our product line and switch over to components
that do
not contain the restricted substances, such as lead, mercury, and cadmium.
This
process involves procurement of the new compliant components, engineering
effort
to integrate and test them, and re-submitting the products for emissions,
safety
and telephone line interface compliance testing and approval. This effort
has
consumed resources and time that would otherwise have been spent on new product
development, which will continue until the product line has been updated.
In
addition, because this has essentially become a worldwide issue for all
electronics manufacturers who wish to sell into the European market, we have
seen increased lead times for compliant components because of the increased
demand. This is an issue that is not unique to ClearOne.
The
European Parliament has also published a directive on Electronic and Electrical
Waste Management (the “WEEE Directive”), which makes producers of certain
electrical and electronic equipment financially responsible for collection,
reuse, recycling, treatment, and disposal of equipment placed on the European
Union market after August 13, 2005. We are currently compliant in terms of
the
labeling requirements, and have finalized the recycling processes with the
appropriate entities within Europe. According to the directive, distributors
of
our product are deemed producers and must comply with this directive by
contracting with a recycler for the recovery, recycling, and reuse of product.
We
may have difficulty in collecting outstanding receivables.
We
grant
credit without requiring collateral to substantially all of our customers.
In
times of economic uncertainty, the risks relating to the granting of such
credit
would typically increase. Although we monitor and mitigate the risks associated
with our credit policies, we cannot ensure that such mitigation will be
effective. We have experienced losses due to customers failing to meet their
obligations. Future losses could be significant and, if incurred, could harm
our
business and have a material adverse effect on our operating results and
financial condition.
20
Interruptions
to our business could adversely affect our operations.
As
with
any company, our operations are at risk of being interrupted by earthquake,
fire, flood, and other natural and human-caused disasters, including terrorist
attacks and disease. Our operations are also at risk of power loss,
telecommunications failure, and other infrastructure and technology based
problems. To help guard against such risks, we carry business interruption
loss
insurance with coverage of up to $5.4 million to help compensate us for losses
that may occur.
Risks
Relating to Our Company
Our
stock price fluctuates as a result of the conduct of our business and stock
market fluctuations.
The
market price of our common stock has experienced significant fluctuations
and
may continue to fluctuate significantly. The market price of our common stock
may be significantly affected by a variety of factors, including:
· |
statements
or changes in opinions, ratings, or earnings estimates made by
brokerage
firms or industry analysts relating to the market in which we do
business
or relating to us specifically;
|
· |
disparity
between our reported results and the projections of
analysts;
|
· |
the
shift in sales mix of products that we currently sell to a sales
mix of
lower-margin product offerings;
|
· |
the
level and mix of inventory levels held by our
distributors;
|
· |
the
announcement of new products or product enhancements by us or our
competitors;
|
· |
technological
innovations by us or our
competitors;
|
· |
quarterly
variations in our results of
operations;
|
· |
general
market conditions or market conditions specific to technology industries;
|
· |
domestic
and international economic
conditions;
|
· |
the
adoption of the new accounting standard, SFAS 123R, “Share-Based Payments”
which will require us to record compensation expense for certain
options
issued under our “1998 Stock Option Plan” before July 1, 2005 and for all
options issued or modified after June 30,
2005;
|
· |
our
ability to report financial information in a timely manner;
and
|
· |
the
markets in which our stock is
traded.
|
Many
of our officers and key personnel have recently joined the company or have
only
worked together for a short period of time.
We
have
recently made several significant changes to our senior management team.
In July
2004, we named a new President and Chief Executive Officer, who had been
serving
as our Vice-President of Product Development since December 2003. In addition,
we hired a new Chief Financial Officer in July 2004, a Vice-President of
Worldwide Sales and Marketing in November 2004, and a Vice-President of
Operations in January 2005. In January 2005, we named a new Vice-President
of
Product Line Management, who had been serving as our Director of Research
and
Development. In September 2005, our Chief Financial Officer resigned his
position and our Corporate Controller was named our Interim Chief Financial
Officer. In February 2006, we eliminated the position of Vice-President of
Human
Resources. As a result of these recent changes in senior management, many
of our
officers and other key personnel have only worked together for a short period
of
time. The failure to successfully integrate senior management could have
an
adverse impact on our business operations, including reduced sales, confusion
with our channel partners, and delays in new product introductions.
21
Our
directors and officers own 18.2 percent of the Company and may exert significant
influence over us.
Our
officers and directors together have beneficial ownership of approximately
18.2
percent of our common stock (including options that are currently exercisable
or
exercisable within 60 days of February 28, 2006). With this significant holding
in the aggregate, the officers and directors, acting together, could exert
a
significant degree of influence over us and may be able to delay or prevent
a
change in control.
ITEM
1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
Not
applicable.
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES
We
currently occupy three leased buildings or offices, all of which are used
in
connection with the products segment of our business. The following table
presents our utilization of these spaces:
Location
|
Operations
|
Square
Footage
|
Status
|
Expiration
of Lease Agreement
|
Active
Leases at June 30, 2005
|
||||
Salt
Lake City, UT
|
Company
headquarters
|
39,760
|
Continuing
|
October
2006
|
Salt
Lake City, UT
|
Manufacturing
facility
|
12,000
|
Partially
subleased
|
October
2006
|
Champlin,
MN
|
Furniture
manufacturing
|
17,520
|
Continuing
|
September
2007
|
Berkshire,
|
||||
United
Kingdom
|
Sales
office
|
250
|
Continuing
|
90
days notice
|
Terminated
Leases, i.e., per contract terms, sale of entity, or through early
termination
|
||||
Dublin,
Ireland
|
Research
and development office
|
4,639
|
Early
buyout
|
November
2002
|
Des
Moines, IA
|
Sales
office
|
1,146
|
Lease
terminated
|
December
2002
|
Woburn,
MA
|
ClearOne,
Inc. acquisition
|
2,206
|
Early
buyout
|
September
2003
|
Golden
Valley, MN
|
U.S.
audiovisual installation services
|
25,523
|
Early
buyout
|
June
2004
|
Westmont,
IL
|
U.S.
audiovisual installation services
|
2,608
|
Lease
expired
|
July
2004
|
Nuremberg,
Germany
|
Sales
office
|
2,153
|
Early
buyout
|
December
2004
|
Ottawa,
Canada
|
Canadian
audiovisual installation services
|
16,190
|
Sold
entity
|
March
2005
|
Our
principal administrative, sales, marketing, customer support, and research
and
development facility is located in our headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Most of our warehousing operations are also located in our Salt Lake City
headquarters. We currently occupy a 51,760 square-foot facility under the
terms
of an operating lease expiring in October 2006. Of the 51,760 square feet,
we
sublet 12,000 square feet to our domestic manufacturer, as discussed below.
We
believe the facility will be reasonably adequate to meet our needs through
October 2006; however, we are currently evaluating our needs for fiscal 2007
and
beyond. Prior to the sale of our conferencing services business, this component
conducted its business from our Salt Lake City headquarters and from July
1,
2004 through February 28, 2005, we sublet 5,416 square feet of space in our
headquarters building to Premiere, the purchaser of our conferencing services
business.
On
August
1, 2005, we entered into a one-year sublease with respect to the 12,000 square
foot manufacturing facility in our headquarters building in connection with
the
outsourcing of our manufacturing operations. This manufacturer pays rent
in the
amount of $11,040 per month and either party may terminate the lease for
any
reason upon 90 days written notice or 60 days written notice to the other
party
of material breach of the agreement. Such space had been provided to this
manufacturer on a rent-free basis from June 20 to July 31, 2005, pending
execution of definitive agreements. On March 2, 2006, this manufacturer provided
the Company with written notice of its intent to terminate the lease on May
31,
2006.
22
Our
conference furniture manufacturing and warehousing operations are conducted
from
a facility totaling 17,520 square feet located in Champlin, Minnesota. We
lease
this facility under a lease agreement that expires in September 2007. We
believe
the facility will be reasonably adequate to meet our needs for the next 12
months.
Our
wholly owned United Kingdom subsidiary, ClearOne Communications Limited UK,
rents an office in Oxfordshire, England, consisting of 250 square feet. The
office space is rented under a managed office arrangement which requires
90 days
notice to terminate the agreement.
Our
wholly owned subsidiary, Gentner Communications Ltd. - Ireland, leased an
office
in Dublin, Ireland for research and development related to video conferencing.
The facility consisted of 431 square meters, of which we sublet 129 square
meters to a third party effective July 2002. We negotiated an early buyout
of
the lease effective November 2002.
Our
U.S.
audiovisual integration services operations rented sales offices located
in Des
Moines, Iowa on a month-to-month basis but such leases were terminated in
December 2002.
We
leased
an office in Woburn, Massachusetts that we initially acquired through the
purchase of ClearOne, Inc. in July 2000. The facility consisted of 2,206
square
feet. We negotiated an early buyout of the lease effective September
2003.
Our
U.S.
audiovisual integration services operations were mainly conducted from a
facility totaling 25,523 square feet located in Golden Valley, Minnesota.
We
leased these facilities under a lease agreement that expired in December
2004.
We negotiated an early buyout of the lease effective June 2004.
Our
U.S.
audiovisual integration services operations leased a sales office in Westmont,
Illinois pursuant to a lease that expired in July 2004. The facility consisted
of 2,608 square feet.
Our
wholly owned subsidiary, ClearOne Communications EuMEA, GmbH, leased an office
in Nuremberg, Germany, consisting of 200 square meters. This office was closed
in December 2004 and the lease was terminated.
Our
wholly owned subsidiary, ClearOne Communications of Canada, Inc. doing business
as OM Video, leased a facility in Ottawa, Canada consisting of 16,190 square
feet, in which our Canadian audiovisual integration services operations were
conducted. We leased this facility under a lease agreement that expired in
July
2005. As discussed herein, we sold this subsidiary in March 2005.
ITEM
3. LEGAL
PROCEEDINGS
In
addition to the legal proceedings described below, we are also involved from
time to time in various claims and other legal proceedings which arise in
the
normal course of our business. Such matters are subject to many uncertainties
and outcomes that are not predictable. However, based on the information
available to us as of February 28, 2006 and after discussions with legal
counsel, we do not believe any such other proceedings will have a material,
adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial position,
or
liquidity, except as described below.
The
SEC Action. On
January 15, 2003, the SEC filed a civil complaint against ClearOne; Frances
Flood, then ClearOne’s Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and President; and
Susie Strohm, then ClearOne’s Chief Financial Officer, in the U.S. District
Court for the District of Utah, Central Division. The complaint alleged that
from the quarter ended March 31, 2001, the defendants engaged in a program
of
inflating ClearOne’s revenues, net income, and accounts receivable by engaging
in improper revenue recognition in violation of U.S. GAAP and Section 17(a)
of
the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 10(b), 13(a), and 13(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and various regulations promulgated thereunder.
Following the filing of the complaint, we placed Ms. Flood and Ms. Strohm
on
administrative leave and they subsequently resigned from their positions
with
the Company. On December 4, 2003, we settled the SEC Action by entering into
a
consent decree in which, without admitting or denying the allegations of
the
complaint, we consented to the entry of a permanent injunction prohibiting
future securities law violations. No fine or penalty was assessed against
the
Company as part of the settlement.
23
On
February 20, 2004, Ms. Flood and Ms. Strohm settled the SEC action by entering
into consent decrees wherein, without admitting or denying the allegations
of
the complaint, they each consented to the entry of a permanent injunction
prohibiting future violations of the antifraud, reporting, and issuer books
and
records requirements of the federal securities laws. The order against Ms.
Flood
also provided for disgorgement in the amount of $71,000 along with prejudgment
interest of $2,882, a civil penalty in the amount of $71,000, and prohibited
Flood from acting as an officer or director of any issuer that has a class
of
securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act or that
is
required to file reports pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. The
order against Ms. Strohm also provided for disgorgement in the amount of
$25,000
together with prejudgment interest in the amount of $1,015 and a civil penalty
in the amount of $25,000. The final settlement of the SEC action as to Ms.
Flood
and Ms. Strohm satisfied the condition precedent contained in the employment
separation agreements entered into by the Company with each of such persons
on
December 5, 2003 (See Item 11. Executive Compensation: Employment Contracts
and
Termination of Employment and Change-in-Control Arrangements).
U.S.
Attorney’s Investigation. As
previously announced on January 28, 2003, the Company has been advised that
the
U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Utah has begun an investigation
stemming from the complaint in the SEC action described above. No pleadings
have
been filed to date and the Company intends on cooperating fully with the
U.S.
Attorney’s Office should any developments occur in the future.
The
Whistleblower Action. On
February 11, 2003, our former Vice-President of Sales filed a whistleblower
claim with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (“OSHA”) under the
employee protection provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act alleging that the
Company had wrongfully terminated his employment for reporting the Company’s
alleged improper revenue recognition practices to the SEC in December 2002,
which precipitated the SEC action against the Company. In February 2004,
OSHA
issued a preliminary order in favor of the former officer, ordering that
he be
reinstated with back pay, lost benefits, and attorney’s fees. The former officer
had also filed a separate lawsuit against the Company in the United States
District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division, alleging various
employment discrimination claims. In May 2004, the Administrative Law Judge
approved a settlement agreement with the former officer pursuant to which
he
released the Company from all claims asserted by him in the OSHA proceeding
and
the federal court action in exchange for a cash payment by the Company. The
settlement did not have a material impact on the Company's results of operations
or financial position.
The
Shareholders’ Class Action. On
June 30, 2003, a Consolidated Complaint was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the District of Utah, Central Division, against the Company, eight
present or former officers and directors of the Company, and Ernst & Young
LLP (“Ernst & Young”), the Company’s former independent public accountants,
by a class consisting of purchasers of the Company’s common stock during the
period from April 17, 2001 through January 15, 2003. The action followed
the
consolidation of several previously filed class action complaints and the
appointment of lead counsel for the class. The allegations in the complaint
were
essentially the same as those contained in the SEC complaint described above.
On
December 4, 2003, the Company, on behalf of itself and all other defendants
with
the exception of Ernst & Young, entered into a settlement agreement with the
class pursuant to which we agreed to pay the class $5.0 million and issue
the
class 1.2 million shares of our common stock. The cash payment was made in
two
equal installments, the first on November 10, 2003 and the second on January
14,
2005. On May 23, 2005, the court order was amended to require the Company
to pay
cash in lieu of stock to those members of the class who would otherwise have
been entitled to receive fewer than 100 shares of stock. On September 29,
2005,
we completed our obligations under the settlement agreement by issuing a
total
of 1,148,494 shares of our common stock to the plaintiff class, including
228,000 shares previously issued in November 2004, and we paid an aggregate
of
$126,705 in cash in lieu of shares to those members of the class who would
otherwise have been entitled to receive an odd-lot number of shares or who
resided in states in which there was no exemption available for the issuance
of
shares. The cash payments were calculated on the basis of $2.46 per share
which
was equal to the higher of (i) the closing price for our common stock as
reported by the Pink Sheets on the business day prior to the date the shares
were mailed or (ii) the average closing price over the five trading days
prior
to such mailing date.
24
The
Shareholder Derivative Actions. Between
March and August 2003, four shareholder derivative actions were filed in
the Third Judicial District Court of Salt Lake County, State of Utah, by
certain
shareholders of the Company against various present and past officers and
directors of the Company and against Ernst & Young. The complaints asserted
allegations similar to those asserted in the SEC complaint and shareholders’
class action described above and also alleged that the defendant directors
and
officers violated their fiduciary duties to the Company by causing or allowing
the Company to recognize revenue in violation of U.S. GAAP and to issue
materially misstated financial statements and that Ernst & Young breached
its professional responsibilities to the Company and acted in violation of
U.S.
GAAP and generally accepted auditing standards by failing to identify or
prevent
the alleged revenue recognition violations and by issuing unqualified audit
opinions with respect to the Company’s fiscal 2002 and 2001 financial
statements. One of these actions was dismissed without prejudice on
June 13, 2003. As to the other three actions, our Board of Directors
appointed a special litigation committee of independent directors to evaluate
the claims. That committee determined that the maintenance of the derivative
proceedings against the individual defendants was not in the best interest
of
the Company. Accordingly, on December 12, 2003, we moved to dismiss those
claims. In March 2004, our motions were granted, and the derivative claims
were dismissed with prejudice as to all defendants except Ernst & Young. The
Company was substituted as the plaintiff in the action and is now pursuing
in
its own name the claims against Ernst & Young.
The
Insurance Coverage Action. On
February 9, 2004, ClearOne and Edward Dallin Bagley (“Bagley”), a director
and significant shareholder of ClearOne, jointly filed an action in the United
States District Court for the District of Utah, Central Division, against
National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania (“National
Union”) and Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company of Berkeley Heights, New Jersey
(“Lumbermens Mutual”), the carriers of certain prior period directors and
officers’ liability insurance policies, to recover the costs of defending and
resolving claims against certain of our present and former directors and
officers in connection with the SEC complaint, the shareholders’ class action,
and the shareholder derivative actions described above, and seeking other
damages resulting from the refusal of such carriers to timely pay the amounts
owing under such liability insurance policies. This action has been consolidated
into a declaratory relief action filed by one of the insurance carriers on
February 6, 2004 against ClearOne and certain of its current and former
directors. In this action, the insurers assert that they are entitled to
rescind
insurance coverage under our directors and officers’ liability insurance
policies, $3.0 million of which was provided by National Union and $2.0 million
which was provided by Lumbermens Mutual, based on alleged misstatements in
our
insurance applications. In February 2005, we entered into a confidential
settlement agreement with Lumbermens Mutual pursuant to which ClearOne and
Bagley received a lump-sum cash amount and the plaintiffs agreed to dismiss
their claims against Lumbermens Mutual with prejudice. The cash settlement
is
held in a segregated account until the claims involving National Union have
been
resolved, at which time the amounts received in the action will be allocated
between the Company and Bagley. The amount distributed to the Company and
Bagley
will be determined based on future negotiations between the Company and Bagley.
The Company cannot currently estimate the amount of the settlement which
it will
ultimately receive. Upon determining the amount of the settlement which the
Company will ultimately receive, the Company will record this as a contingent
gain. On October 21, 2005, the court granted summary judgment in favor of
National Union on its rescission defense and accordingly entered a judgment
dismissing all of the claims asserted by ClearOne and Mr. Bagley. In connection
with the summary judgment, the Company has been ordered to pay approximately
$59,000 in expenses. However, due to the Lumbermens Mutual cash proceeds
discussed above and the appeal to the summary judgment discussed below, this
potential liability has not been recorded in the balance sheet as of June
30,
2005. On February 2, 2006, the Company and Mr. Bagley filed an appeal to
the
summary judgment granted on October 21, 2005 and intend to vigorously pursue
the
appeal and any follow-up proceedings regarding their claims against National
Union, although no assurances can be given that they will be successful.
The
Company and Mr. Bagley have entered into a Joint Prosecution and Defense
Agreement in connection with the action and the Company is paying all litigation
expenses except litigation expenses which are solely related to Mr. Bagley’s
claims in the litigation. (See “Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions”.)
Wells
Submission. We
have
been advised by the staff of the Salt Lake District Office of the SEC that
the
staff intended to recommend to the Commission that administrative proceedings
be
instituted to revoke the registration of the Company’s common stock based on the
Company’s failure to timely file annual and quarterly reports with the
Commission. The Company provided the staff with a so-called “Wells Submission”
setting forth its position with respect to the staff’s intended recommendation.
To date, the Commission has not instituted an administrative proceeding against
the Company, however, there can be no assurance that the Commission will
not
institute an administrative proceeding in the future or that the Company
would
prevail if an administrative proceeding were instituted.
25
The
Pacific Technology & Telecommunications Collection Action.
On
August 12, 2003, we initiated a commercial arbitration proceeding against
Pacific Technology & Telecommunications (“PT&T”), a former distributor,
seeking to collect approximately $1.8 million that PT&T owed ClearOne for
inventory it purchased and received but did not pay for. PT&T denied our
claim and asserted counterclaims. Subsequently, on April 20, 2004, PT&T
filed for protection under Chapter 7 of the United States Bankruptcy Code,
which
had the effect of staying the proceeding. Following PT&T’s bankruptcy
filing, the Company negotiated a settlement with the bankruptcy trustee.
Under
the settlement, which has been approved by the bankruptcy court, the Company
paid $25,000 and obtained the right to recover all unsold ClearOne inventory
held by PT&T and the right to pursue on the basis of an assignment any
claims that PT&T may have against any of its own officers or directors,
subject, however, to a maximum recovery of $800,000. The Company is currently
in
the process of investigating whether any such claims exist and, if so, whether
it would be in the Company’s best interest to pursue them given the anticipated
legal expenses and the uncertainties of being able to collect any resulting
favorable judgment. The settlement also resulted in the release and dismissal
with prejudice of all of PT&T’s claims against the Company. To date, the
Company has not recovered any inventory held by PT&T.
ITEM
4. SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
No
matters were submitted to a vote of our security holders during fiscal
2005.
26
PART
II
ITEM
5. MARKET
FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS, AND ISSUER
PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
Market
Information
From
April 21, 2003 until February 10, 2006, our common stock was quoted on an
unsolicited basis on the National Quotation Bureau’s Pink Sheets under the
symbol “CLRO.” On February 10, 2006, the Pink Sheets blocked the publication of
quotations for our common stock on its public website due to our failure
to file
current public information. The following table sets forth the high and low
bid
quotations for the common stock for the last two fiscal years as provided
by
Pink Sheets.
2005
|
2004
|
||||||||||||
High
|
Low
|
High
|
Low
|
||||||||||
First
Quarter
|
$
|
5.70
|
$
|
3.50
|
$
|
2.15
|
$
|
1.70
|
|||||
Second
Quarter
|
4.80
|
3.55
|
4.35
|
1.78
|
|||||||||
Third
Quarter
|
4.30
|
3.00
|
7.96
|
3.70
|
|||||||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
3.65
|
2.25
|
6.50
|
4.40
|
On
February 28, 2006, the high and low sales prices for our common stock on
the
Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board were $2.90 and $2.70, respectively.
Shareholders
As
of
February 28, 2006, there were 12,184,727 shares of our common stock issued
and
outstanding and held by approximately 618 shareholders of record. This number
counts each broker dealer and clearing corporation, who hold shares for their
customers, as a single shareholder.
Dividends
We
have
not paid a cash dividend on our common stock and do not anticipate doing
so in
the foreseeable future. We intend to retain earnings to fund future working
capital requirements, infrastructure needs, growth, and product
development.
Securities
Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans
We
currently have two equity compensation plans in effect, our 1990 Incentive
Plan
(the “1990 Plan”) and our 1998 Stock Option Plan (the “1998 Plan”), both of
which provide for the grant of stock options to employees, directors and
consultants. As of June 30, 2005, there were 30,750 options outstanding under
the 1990 Plan with no additional options available for grant under such plan,
and 1,462,362 options outstanding under the 1998 Plan with 735,514 options
available for grant in the future. The Company has determined not to permit
the
exercise of stock options granted under the 1990 Plan or the 1998 Plan until
such time as we are current in the filing of periodic reports with the SEC.
The
Company also provided for an extension of the exercise period of certain
options
to prevent them from expiring without the holder having had the opportunity
to
exercise them.
27
The
following table sets forth information as of June 30, 2005 with respect to
compensation plans under which equity securities of ClearOne are authorized
for
issuance.
Number
of securities to be issued upon exercise of outstanding options,
warrants,
and rights
|
Weighted-average
exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and
rights
|
Number
of securities remaining available for future issuance under equity
compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in column
(a))
|
|
(a)
|
(b)
|
(
c )
|
|
Equity
compensation
|
|||
plans
approved by
|
|||
security
holders
|
1,493,112
|
$6.21
|
735,514
|
Equity
compensation
|
|||
plans
not approved by
|
|||
security
holders
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
Total
|
1,493,112
|
$6.21
|
735,514
|
Recent
Sales of Unregistered Securities: Use of Proceeds from Registered
Securities.
On
September 29, 2005, we completed our obligations under the settlement agreement
in the class action lawsuit by issuing a total of 1,148,494 shares of our
common
stock to the plaintiff class, including 228,000 shares previously issued
in
November 2004, and paying an aggregate of $126,705 in cash in lieu of shares
to
those members of the class who would otherwise have been entitled to receive
an
odd-lot number of shares or who resided in states in which there was no
exemption available for the issuance of shares. The shares were issued in
reliance on the exemption from the registration requirements of the Securities
Act provided by Section 3(a)(10) thereof.
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities.
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, ClearOne did not purchase any of its
equity
securities.
Cancellation
of Shares of Executive Officers.
As
discussed herein in “Item 11: Executive Compensation: Employment Contracts and
Termination of Employment and Change-in-Control Arrangements,” on December 5,
2003, the Company entered into employment separation agreements with each
of
Frances Flood, the Company’s former Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and
President, and Susie Strohm, the Company’s former Chief Financial Officer, which
generally provided that such persons would resign from their positions and
employment with the Company, and the Company would make one-time, lump-sum
payments to such persons in consideration of their surrender and delivery
to the
Company of shares of the Company’s common stock and Company stock options and
their release of claims against the Company. Ms. Flood surrendered and returned
35,000 shares of the Company’s common stock and 706,434 stock options (461,433
of which were vested) and Ms. Strohm surrendered and returned 15,500 shares
of
the Company’s common stock and 268,464 stock options (171,963 of which were
vested) to the Company. These shares were retired in May 2004 and were valued
by
the Company at $63,000 in the fiscal 2004 consolidated statement of
shareholders’ equity. On July 15, 2004, an agreement was entered into with
Angelina Beitia, the Company’s former Vice-President, which generally provided
for a lump-sum payment of $100,000 and her surrendered and delivery to the
Company of 145,000 stock options (10,624 of which were vested). On February
20,
2006, an agreement was entered into with DeLonie Call, the Company’s former
Vice-President, which generally provided for a severance payment of $93,300
and
her surrender and delivery to the Company of 145,000 stock options (86,853
of
which were vested).
Employee
Stock Purchase Program.
We have
an Employee Stock Purchase Program (“ESPP”). A total of 500,000 shares of common
stock were reserved for issuance under the ESPP. During the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2005, no shares of common stock were issued under the ESPP and
compensation expense was $0. The program was suspended during fiscal 2003
due to
the Company’s failure to remain current in its filing of periodic reports with
the SEC. We are currently evaluating the possible reinstatement of this program
after the Company becomes current with its filing of periodic reports with
the
SEC.
28
ITEM
6. SELECTED
FINANCIAL DATA
The
following selected financial data has been derived from our audited consolidated
financial statements for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, 2003,
2002,
and 2001. The data in the table below has been adjusted to reflect discontinued
operations of a portion of our business services segment and our conferencing
services segment as held for sale. The information set forth below is not
necessarily indicative of results of future operations, and should be read
in
conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations” and the consolidated financial statements and related
notes thereto included elsewhere in this Form 10-K.
SELECTED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
(in
thousands, except share data)
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
2002
|
2001
|
||||||||||||
Operating
results:
|
||||||||||||||||
Revenue
|
$
|
31,645
|
$
|
27,966
|
$
|
28,566
|
$
|
26,253
|
$
|
22,448
|
||||||
Costs
and expenses:
|
||||||||||||||||
Cost of goods sold
|
14,951
|
16,379
|
18,115
|
13,884
|
9,204
|
|||||||||||
Marketing and selling
|
9,070
|
8,497
|
7,070
|
7,010
|
5,273
|
|||||||||||
General and administrative
|
5,489
|
6,767
|
5,915
|
4,376
|
2,612
|
|||||||||||
Settlement in shareholders' class action
|
(2,046
|
)
|
4,080
|
7,325
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||
Research and product development
|
5,305
|
4,237
|
3,281
|
3,810
|
2,747
|
|||||||||||
Impairment losses
|
180
|
-
|
5,102
|
7,115
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Restructuring charge
|
110
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Purchased in-process research and development
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
728
|
|||||||||||
Operating
(loss) income
|
(1,414
|
)
|
(11,994
|
)
|
(18,242
|
)
|
(9,942
|
)
|
1,884
|
|||||||
Other income (expense), net
|
318
|
(261
|
)
|
48
|
288
|
188
|
||||||||||
(Loss)
Income from continuing operations before income taxes
|
(1,096
|
)
|
(12,255
|
)
|
(18,194
|
)
|
(9,654
|
)
|
2,072
|
|||||||
Benefit
(provision) for income taxes
|
3,248
|
736
|
1,352
|
173
|
(403
|
)
|
||||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
2,152
|
(11,519
|
)
|
(16,842
|
)
|
(9,481
|
)
|
1,669
|
||||||||
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations
|
13,923
|
1,632
|
(19,130
|
)
|
2,820
|
1,949
|
||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
16,075
|
$
|
(9,887
|
)
|
$
|
(35,972
|
)
|
$
|
(6,661
|
)
|
$
|
3,618
|
|||
Earnings
(loss) per common share:
|
||||||||||||||||
Basic
earnings (loss) from continuing operations
|
$
|
0.19
|
$
|
(1.04
|
)
|
$
|
(1.50
|
)
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
$
|
0.19
|
|||
Diluted
earnings (loss) from continuing operations
|
$
|
0.17
|
$
|
(1.04
|
)
|
$
|
(1.50
|
)
|
$
|
(0.99
|
)
|
$
|
0.18
|
|||
Basic
earnings (loss) from discontinued operations
|
$
|
1.25
|
$
|
0.15
|
$
|
(1.71
|
)
|
$
|
0.30
|
$
|
0.23
|
|||||
Diluted
earnings (loss) from discontinued operations
|
$
|
1.13
|
$
|
0.15
|
$
|
(1.71
|
)
|
$
|
0.30
|
$
|
0.21
|
|||||
Basic
earnings (loss)
|
$
|
1.44
|
$
|
(0.89
|
)
|
$
|
(3.21
|
)
|
$
|
(0.69
|
)
|
$
|
0.42
|
|||
Diluted
earnings (loss)
|
$
|
1.30
|
$
|
(0.89
|
)
|
$
|
(3.21
|
)
|
$
|
(0.69
|
)
|
$
|
0.39
|
|||
Weighted
average shares outstanding:
|
||||||||||||||||
Basic
|
11,177,406
|
11,057,896
|
11,183,339
|
9,588,118
|
8,593,725
|
|||||||||||
Diluted
|
12,332,106
|
11,057,896
|
11,183,339
|
9,588,118
|
9,194,009
|
As
of June 30,
|
||||||||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
2002
|
2001
|
||||||||||||
Financial
data:
|
||||||||||||||||
Current
assets
|
$
|
34,879
|
$
|
27,202
|
$
|
29,365
|
$
|
52,304
|
$
|
20,264
|
||||||
Property,
plant and equipment, net
|
2,805
|
4,027
|
4,320
|
4,678
|
3,021
|
|||||||||||
Total
assets
|
38,021
|
32,156
|
35,276
|
63,876
|
25,311
|
|||||||||||
Long-term
debt, net of current maturities
|
-
|
240
|
931
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Capital
leases, net of current maturities
|
-
|
2
|
9
|
41
|
48
|
|||||||||||
Total
shareholders' equity
|
24,911
|
9,006
|
18,743
|
53,892
|
20,728
|
29
Quarterly
Financial Data (Unaudited)
The
following table is a summary of unaudited quarterly financial information
for
the years ended June 30, 2005 and 2004.
Fiscal
2005 Quarters Ended
|
||||||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||
Sept.
30
|
Dec.
31
|
Mar.
31
|
June
30
|
Total
|
||||||||||||
Net
revenue
|
$
|
6,747
|
$
|
8,692
|
$
|
7,103
|
$
|
9,103
|
$
|
31,645
|
||||||
Cost
of goods sold
|
(3,797
|
)
|
(3,948
|
)
|
(3,180
|
)
|
(4,026
|
)
|
(14,951
|
)
|
||||||
Marketing
and selling
|
(2,086
|
)
|
(2,341
|
)
|
(2,151
|
)
|
(2,492
|
)
|
(9,070
|
)
|
||||||
General
and administrative
|
(1,435
|
)
|
(1,388
|
)
|
(1,287
|
)
|
(1,379
|
)
|
(5,489
|
)
|
||||||
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
1,020
|
734
|
855
|
(563
|
)
|
2,046
|
||||||||||
Research
and product development
|
(1,105
|
)
|
(1,282
|
)
|
(1,423
|
)
|
(1,495
|
)
|
(5,305
|
)
|
||||||
Impairment
losses
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(180
|
)
|
(180
|
)
|
|||||||||
Restructuring
charge
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(110
|
)
|
(110
|
)
|
|||||||||
Other
income (expense)
|
34
|
64
|
95
|
125
|
318
|
|||||||||||
(Loss)
income from continuing operations before income taxes
|
(622
|
)
|
531
|
12
|
(1,017
|
)
|
(1,096
|
)
|
||||||||
Benefit
(provision) for income taxes
|
232
|
(198
|
)
|
(5
|
)
|
3,219
|
3,248
|
|||||||||
(Loss)
income from continuing operations
|
(390
|
)
|
333
|
7
|
2,202
|
2,152
|
||||||||||
Income
from discontinued operations
|
13,346
|
73
|
388
|
116
|
13,923
|
|||||||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
12,956
|
$
|
406
|
$
|
395
|
$
|
2,318
|
$
|
16,075
|
||||||
Basic
income (loss) earnings per common share:
|
||||||||||||||||
Continuing
operations
|
$
|
(0.04
|
)
|
$
|
0.03
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
0.20
|
$
|
0.19
|
|||||
Discontinued
operations
|
1.20
|
0.01
|
0.03
|
0.01
|
1.25
|
|||||||||||
Basic
income (loss) earnings per common share
|
$
|
1.16
|
$
|
0.04
|
$
|
0.03
|
$
|
0.21
|
$
|
1.44
|
||||||
Diluted
income (loss) earnings per common share:
|
||||||||||||||||
Continuing
operations
|
$
|
(0.03
|
)
|
$
|
0.02
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
0.18
|
$
|
0.17
|
|||||
Discontinued
operations
|
1.08
|
0.01
|
0.03
|
0.01
|
1.13
|
|||||||||||
Diluted
income (loss) earnings per common share
|
$
|
1.05
|
$
|
0.03
|
$
|
0.03
|
$
|
0.19
|
$
|
1.30
|
Fiscal
2004 Quarters Ended
|
||||||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||
Sept.
30
|
Dec.
31
|
Mar.
31
|
June
30
|
Total
|
||||||||||||
Net
revenue
|
$
|
7,737
|
$
|
6,715
|
$
|
6,652
|
$
|
6,862
|
$
|
27,966
|
||||||
Cost
of goods sold
|
(5,165
|
)
|
(3,278
|
)
|
(4,392
|
)
|
(3,544
|
)
|
(16,379
|
)
|
||||||
Marketing
and selling
|
(2,012
|
)
|
(2,004
|
)
|
(2,129
|
)
|
(2,352
|
)
|
(8,497
|
)
|
||||||
General
and administrative
|
(1,583
|
)
|
(1,639
|
)
|
(1,738
|
)
|
(1,807
|
)
|
(6,767
|
)
|
||||||
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
-
|
(2,100
|
)
|
(3,240
|
)
|
1,260
|
(4,080
|
)
|
||||||||
Research
and product development
|
(925
|
)
|
(829
|
)
|
(1,112
|
)
|
(1,371
|
)
|
(4,237
|
)
|
||||||
Other
income (expense)
|
1
|
(65
|
)
|
(2
|
)
|
(195
|
)
|
(261
|
)
|
|||||||
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
(1,947
|
)
|
(3,200
|
)
|
(5,961
|
)
|
(1,147
|
)
|
(12,255
|
)
|
||||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
123
|
109
|
426
|
78
|
736
|
|||||||||||
Loss
from continuing operations
|
(1,824
|
)
|
(3,091
|
)
|
(5,535
|
)
|
(1,069
|
)
|
(11,519
|
)
|
||||||
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations
|
661
|
(66
|
)
|
690
|
347
|
1,632
|
||||||||||
Net
loss
|
$
|
(1,163
|
)
|
$
|
(3,157
|
)
|
$
|
(4,845
|
)
|
$
|
(722
|
)
|
$
|
(9,887
|
)
|
|
Basic
(loss) earnings per common share:
|
||||||||||||||||
Continuing
operations
|
$
|
(0.16
|
)
|
$
|
(0.28
|
)
|
$
|
(0.50
|
)
|
$
|
(0.10
|
)
|
$
|
(1.04
|
)
|
|
Discontinued
operations
|
0.06
|
-
|
0.06
|
0.03
|
0.15
|
|||||||||||
Basic
(loss) earnings per common share
|
$
|
(0.10
|
)
|
$
|
(0.28
|
)
|
$
|
(0.44
|
)
|
$
|
(0.07
|
)
|
$
|
(0.89
|
)
|
|
Diluted
(loss) earnings per common share:
|
||||||||||||||||
Continuing
operations
|
$
|
(0.16
|
)
|
$
|
(0.28
|
)
|
$
|
(0.50
|
)
|
$
|
(0.10
|
)
|
$
|
(1.04
|
)
|
|
Discontinued
operations
|
0.06
|
-
|
0.06
|
0.03
|
0.15
|
|||||||||||
Diluted
(loss) earnings per common share
|
$
|
(0.10
|
)
|
$
|
(0.28
|
)
|
$
|
(0.44
|
)
|
$
|
(0.07
|
)
|
$
|
(0.89
|
)
|
30
ITEM
7. MANAGEMENT'S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
The
following discussion should be read in conjunction with our June 30,
2005
Consolidated Financial Statements and related Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This
discussion contains forward-looking statements based on current expectations
that involve risks and uncertainties, such as our plans, objectives,
expectations, and intentions, as set forth under “Disclosure Regarding
Forward-Looking Statements.” Our actual results and the timing of events could
differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements
as
a result of various factors, including those set forth in the following
discussion and under the caption “Risk Factors” in Item 1. Description of
Business and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Unless otherwise
indicated, all references to a year reflect our fiscal year that ends
on June
30.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Our
discussion and analysis of our results of operations and financial position
are
based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared
in
conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. We review
the
accounting policies used in reporting our financial results on a regular
basis.
The preparation of these financial statements requires management to
make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets
and
liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the
date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses
during the reporting period. We evaluate our assumptions and estimates
on an
ongoing basis and may employ outside experts to assist in our evaluations.
We
believe that the estimates we use are reasonable; however, actual results
could
differ from those estimates. Our significant accounting policies are
described
in Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere
in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K. We believe the following critical accounting
policies affect our more significant assumptions and estimates that we
used to
prepare our consolidated financial statements.
Revenue
and Associated Allowances for Revenue Adjustments and Doubtful
Accounts
Included
in continuing operations are two sources of revenue: (i) product revenue,
primarily from product sales to distributors, dealers, and end-users;
and (ii)
business services revenue, which includes one software license agreement
associated with our broadcast telephone interface product line, a perpetual
software license to use the Company’s technology, along with one free year of
maintenance and support, and transition services for 90 days.
Product
revenue is recognized when (i) the products are shipped, (ii) persuasive
evidence of an arrangement exists, (iii) the price is fixed and determinable,
and (iv) collection is reasonably assured. Beginning in 2001, we modified
our
sales channels to include distributors. These distributors were generally
thinly
capitalized with little or no financial resources and did not have the
wherewithal to pay for these products when delivered by us. Furthermore,
in a
substantial number of cases, significant amounts of inventories were
returned or
never paid for and the payment for product sold (to both distributors
and
non-distributors) was regularly subject to a final negotiation with our
customers. As a result of such negotiations, we routinely agreed to significant
concessions from the originally invoiced amounts to facilitate collection.
These
practices continued to exist through the fiscal year ended June 30,
2003.
Accordingly,
amounts charged to both distributors and non-distributors were not considered
fixed and determinable or reasonably collectible until cash was collected
and
thus, there was a delay in our recognition of revenue and related cost
of goods
sold from the time of product shipment until invoices were paid. As a
result,
the June 30, 2003 balance sheet reflects no accounts receivable or deferred
revenue related to product sales. During the fiscal year ended June 30,
2004, we
recognized $5.2 million in revenues and $1.7 million in cost of goods
sold that
were deferred in prior periods since cash had not been collected as of
the end
of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003.
During
the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, we had in place improved
credit
policies and procedures, an approval process for sales returns and credit
memos,
processes for managing and monitoring channel inventory levels, better
trained
staff, and discontinued the practice of frequently granting significant
concessions from the originally invoiced amount. As a result of these
improved
policies and procedures, we extend credit to customers who we believe
have the
wherewithal to pay.
31
We
provide a right of return on product sales to distributors. Currently,
we do not
have sufficient historical return experience with our distributors that
is
predictive of future events given historical excess levels of inventory
in the
distribution channel. Accordingly, revenue from product sales to distributors
is
not recognized until the return privilege has expired, which approximates
when
product is sold-through to customers of the Company’s distributors (dealers,
system integrators, value-added resellers, and end-users). Although,
certain
distributors provide certain channel inventory amounts, we make judgments
and
estimates with regard to the amount of inventory in the entire channel,
for
all customers and for all channel inventory items, and the appropriate
revenue and cost of goods sold associated with those channel
products. Although these assumptions and judgments regarding total channel
inventory revenue and cost of goods sold could differ from actual
amounts, we believe that our calculations are indicative of actual levels
of
inventory in the distribution channel. As of June 30, 2004, we deferred
$6.2 million in revenue and $2.4 million in cost of goods sold related
to
products sold where return rights had not lapsed. As of June 30, 2005,
we
deferred $5.1 million in revenue and $2.3 million in cost of goods sold
related
to products sold where return rights had not lapsed. The amounts of deferred
cost of goods sold were included in consigned inventory.
We
offer
rebates and market development funds to certain of our distributors based
upon
volume of product purchased by such distributors. We record rebates as
a
reduction of revenue in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”)
Issue No. 00-22, “Accounting for Points and Certain Other Time-Based or
Volume-Based Sales Incentive Offers, and Offers for Free Products or
Services to
Be Delivered in the Future.” Beginning January 1, 2002, we adopted EITF Issue
No. 01-9, “Accounting for Consideration Given by a Vendor to a Customer
(Including a Reseller of the Vendor’s Products).” We continue to record rebates
as a reduction of revenue in the period revenue is recognized.
We
provide advance replacement units to end-users on defective units of
certain
products within 90 days of purchase date by the end-user. Since the purpose
of
these units are not revenue generating, we track the units due from the
end-user, valued at retail price, until the defective unit has been returned,
but no receivable balance is maintained on our balance sheet. Retail
price value
of in-transit advance replacement units was $81,000 and $91,000, as of
June 30,
2005 and 2004, respectively.
We
offer
credit terms on the sale of our products to a majority of our customers
and
perform ongoing credit evaluations of our customers’ financial condition. We
maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting
from
the inability or unwillingness of our customers to make required payments
based
upon our historical collection experience and expected collectibility
of all
accounts receivable. Our actual bad debts in future periods may differ
from our
current estimates and the differences may be material, which may have
an adverse
impact on our future accounts receivable and cash position.
Goodwill
and Purchased Intangibles
We
assess
the impairment of goodwill and other identifiable intangibles annually
or
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying
value may
not be recoverable. Some factors we consider important which could trigger
an
impairment review include the following:
· |
Significant
underperformance relative to projected future operating
results;
|
· |
Significant
changes in the manner of our use of the acquired assets or
the strategy
for our overall business; and
|
· |
Significant
negative industry or economic
trends.
|
If
we
determine that the carrying value of goodwill and other identified intangibles
may not be recoverable based upon the existence of one or more of the
above
indicators of impairment, we would typically measure any impairment based
on a
projected discounted cash flow method using a discount rate determined
by us to
be commensurate
with the risk inherent in our current business model. We evaluate goodwill
for
impairment at least annually.
32
On
July
1, 2002, we completed our transitional goodwill and purchased intangibles
impairment tests outlined under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(“SFAS”) No. 142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets,” which required the
assessment of goodwill and purchased intangibles for impairment, and
in the
fourth quarter of fiscal 2003, we completed our annual impairment tests.
As of
June 30, 2003, we determined that our goodwill assets and purchased intangible
assets were impaired and we recorded an impairment charge of $25.5 million
related to these assets. We
plan
to conduct our annual impairment tests in the fourth quarter of every
fiscal
year, unless impairment indicators exist sooner. Screening for and assessing
whether impairment indicators exist or if events or changes in circumstances
have occurred, including market conditions, operating fundamentals, competition,
and general economic conditions, requires significant judgment. Additionally,
changes in the high-technology industry occur frequently and quickly.
Therefore,
there can be no assurance that a charge to operations will not occur
as a result
of future purchased intangible impairment tests.
Accounting
for Income Taxes
We
are
subject to income taxes in both the United States and in certain non-U.S.
jurisdictions. We estimate our current tax position together with our
future tax
consequences attributable to temporary differences resulting from differing
treatment of items, such as deferred revenue, depreciation, and other
reserves
for tax and accounting purposes. These temporary differences result in
deferred
tax assets and liabilities. We must then assess the likelihood that our
deferred
tax assets will be recovered from future taxable income, prior year carryback,
or future reversals of existing taxable temporary differences. To the
extent we
believe that recovery is not more likely than not, we establish a valuation
allowance against these deferred tax assets. Significant management judgment
is
required in determining our provision for income taxes, our deferred
tax assets
and liabilities, and any valuation allowance recorded against our deferred
tax
assets. To the extent we establish a valuation allowance in a period,
we must
include and expense the allowance within the tax provision in the consolidated
statement of operations.
Lower-of-Cost
or Market Adjustments and Reserves for Excess and Obsolete
Inventory
We
account for our inventory on a first-in, first-out (“FIFO”) basis, and make
appropriate adjustments on a quarterly basis to write-down the value
of
inventory to the lower-of-cost or market.
In
order
to determine what, if any, inventory needs to be written down, we perform
a
quarterly analysis of obsolete and slow-moving inventory. In general,
we
write-down our excess and obsolete inventory by an amount that is equal
to the
difference between the cost of the inventory and its estimated market
value if
market value is less than cost, based upon assumptions about future product
life-cycles, product demand, and market conditions. Those items that
are found
to have a supply in excess of our estimated demand are considered to
be
slow-moving or obsolete and the appropriate reserve is made to write-down
the
value of that inventory to its realizable value. These charges are recorded
in
cost of goods sold. At the point of the loss recognition, a new, lower-cost
basis for that inventory is established and subsequent changes in facts
and
circumstances do not result in the restoration or increase in that newly
established cost basis. If there were to be a sudden and significant
decrease in
demand for our products, or if there were a higher incidence of inventory
obsolescence because of rapidly changing technology and customer requirements,
we could be required to increase our inventory allowances, and our gross
profit
could be adversely affected.
BUSINESS
OVERVIEW
We
are an
audio conferencing products company. We develop, manufacture, market,
and
service a comprehensive line of audio conferencing products, which range
from
tabletop conferencing phones to professionally installed audio systems.
We
believe we have a strong history of product innovation and plan to continue
to
apply our expertise in audio engineering to developing innovative new
products.
The performance and reliability of our high-quality solutions create
a natural
communication environment, which saves organizations of all sizes time
and money
by enabling more effective and efficient communication between geographically
separated businesses, employees, and customers.
33
DISCUSSION
OF OPERATIONS
Results
of Operations
The
following table sets forth certain items from our consolidated statements
of
operations (in thousands) for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004,
and
2003, together with the percentage of total revenue which each such item
represents:
Year
Ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
|||||||||||||||||
%
of Revenue
|
%
of Revenue
|
%
of Revenue
|
|||||||||||||||||
Revenue
|
$
|
31,645
|
100.0%
|
|
$
|
27,966
|
100.0%
|
|
$
|
28,566
|
100.0%
|
|
|||||||
Cost
of goods sold
|
14,951
|
47.2%
|
|
16,379
|
58.6%
|
|
18,115
|
63.4%
|
|
||||||||||
Gross
profit
|
16,694
|
52.8%
|
|
11,587
|
41.4%
|
|
10,451
|
36.6%
|
|
||||||||||
Operating
expenses:
|
|
||||||||||||||||||
Marketing
and selling
|
9,070
|
28.7%
|
|
8,497
|
30.4%
|
|
7,070
|
24.7%
|
|
||||||||||
General
and administrative
|
5,489
|
17.3%
|
|
6,767
|
24.2%
|
|
5,915
|
20.7%
|
|
||||||||||
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
(2,046
|
)
|
-6.5%
|
|
4,080
|
14.6%
|
|
7,325
|
25.6%
|
|
|||||||||
Research
and product development
|
5,305
|
16.8%
|
|
4,237
|
15.2%
|
|
3,281
|
11.5%
|
|
||||||||||
Impairment
losses
|
180
|
0.6%
|
|
-
|
0.0%
|
|
5,102
|
17.9%
|
|
||||||||||
Restructuring
charge
|
110
|
0.3%
|
|
-
|
0.0%
|
|
-
|
0.0%
|
|
||||||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
18,108
|
57.2%
|
|
23,581
|
84.3%
|
|
28,693
|
100.4%
|
|
||||||||||
Operating
loss
|
(1,414
|
)
|
-4.5%
|
|
(11,994
|
)
|
-42.9%
|
|
(18,242
|
)
|
-63.9%
|
|
|||||||
Other
income (expense), net
|
318
|
1.0%
|
|
(261
|
)
|
-0.9%
|
|
48
|
0.2%
|
|
|||||||||
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
(1,096
|
)
|
-3.5%
|
|
(12,255
|
)
|
-43.8%
|
|
(18,194
|
)
|
-63.7%
|
|
|||||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
3,248
|
10.3%
|
|
736
|
2.6%
|
|
1,352
|
4.7%
|
|
||||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
2,152
|
6.8%
|
|
(11,519
|
)
|
-41.2%
|
|
(16,842
|
)
|
-59.0%
|
|
||||||||
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
13,923
|
44.0%
|
|
1,632
|
5.8%
|
|
(19,130
|
)
|
-67.0%
|
|
|||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
16,075
|
50.8%
|
|
$
|
(9,887
|
)
|
-35.4%
|
|
$
|
(35,972
|
)
|
-125.9%
|
|
Our
revenue increased 10.8 percent over the three-year period from $28.6
million in
fiscal 2003 to $31.6 million in fiscal 2005. During the fiscal years
ended June
30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, we introduced several new products in our
products
segment, including our MAX® tabletop audio conferencing products; our RAV™ audio
conferencing systems; and our conferencing peripherals, including the
AccuMic®
product line. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005 settlement
in
shareholders’ class action expense decreased $6.1 million from fiscal 2004
levels due to a quarterly mark-to-market adjustment of the liability
associated
with our December 2003 settlement agreement, while general and administrative
(“G&A”) expense for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003 were
significantly higher due to professional fees associated with the settlement
agreement and other related lawsuits. During this period, we changed
our
business mix through one acquisition and three dispositions. Additionally,
we
reclassified our U.S. audiovisual integration services business component,
our
conferencing services component, and our Canadian audiovisual integration
services business component to discontinued operations.
The
following is a discussion of our results of operations for our fiscal
years
ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003. For each of our business segments,
we
discuss revenue and gross profit. All other items are discussed on
a
consolidated basis.
34
Fiscal
Year Ended June 30, 2005 (“Fiscal 2005”)
Compared
to Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2004 (“Fiscal 2004”)
Revenue
For
the
fiscal years ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, revenues by business segment
were as
follows:
Year
Ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
|||||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||||||||
%
of Revenue
|
%
of Revenue
|
||||||||||||
Product
|
$
|
31,645
|
100.0%
|
|
$
|
27,836
|
99.5%
|
|
|||||
Business
services
|
-
|
0.0%
|
|
130
|
0.5%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
31,645
|
100.0%
|
|
$
|
27,966
|
100.0%
|
|
Product.
Product
revenue increased $3.8 million, or 13.7 percent, in fiscal 2005 compared
to
fiscal 2004. The increase in revenue was primarily due to increased
professional
audio conferencing products sales and the introduction of new products
including
the MaxAttach and RAV products. During the fiscal year ended June 30,
2005, we
recognized $1.1 million in net revenues for product revenue that was
deferred in
prior periods where return rights had not lapsed as of the end of the
fiscal
year ended June 30, 2004.
The
following table relates to individual unit shipments to our distributors
for
certain of our product lines for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005
and 2004
and due to our current revenue recognition policy will not tie directly
to
recognized revenues:
Year
Ended June 30,
|
||
(by
individual unit)
|
||
2005
|
2004
|
|
Professional
audio conferencing
|
10,786
|
10,576
|
Premium
and tabletop conferencing
|
11,782
|
9,813
|
Business
Services.
Business
services revenue decreased $130,000, or 100.0 percent, in fiscal 2005
compared
to fiscal 2004. During fiscal 2004, we recognized $130,000 in revenue
due to the
sale of a software license associated with our telephone interface
products to
Comrex.
Total
Revenue.
Total
revenue increased $3.7 million, or 13.2 percent, in fiscal 2005 compared
to
fiscal 2004. The overall increase in revenue during fiscal 2005 was
attributable
to our products segment. Product revenue from sales outside of the
United States
accounted for 25.9 percent of total revenue for fiscal 2005 and 22.7
percent of
total revenue for fiscal 2004.
35
Costs
of Goods Sold and Gross Profit
Costs
of
goods sold (“COGS”) from the product segment includes expenses associated with
finished goods purchased from outsourced manufacturers, the manufacture
of our
products, including material and direct labor, our manufacturing and
operations
organization, tooling amortization, warranty expense, freight expense,
royalty
payments, and the allocation of overhead expenses.
Year
Ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
|||||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||||||||
%
of Revenue
|
%
of Revenue
|
||||||||||||
Cost
of goods sold
|
|||||||||||||
Product
|
$
|
14,951
|
47.2%
|
|
$
|
16,379
|
58.6%
|
|
|||||
Business
services
|
-
|
0.0%
|
|
-
|
0.0%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
14,951
|
47.2%
|
|
$
|
16,379
|
58.6%
|
|
|||||
Gross
profit
|
|||||||||||||
Product
|
$
|
16,694
|
52.8%
|
|
$
|
11,457
|
41.0%
|
|
|||||
Business
services
|
-
|
0.0%
|
|
130
|
0.4%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
16,694
|
52.8%
|
|
$
|
11,587
|
41.4%
|
|
COGS
decreased by approximately $1.4 million, or 8.7 percent, to $15.0 million
in
fiscal 2005 compared with $16.4 million in fiscal 2004. The decrease
in COGS
from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005 was primarily attributable to a decrease
in our
obsolete product inventory write-offs of $2.4 million, a $777,000 decrease
in
our manufacturing absorption costs due to cost cutting and improving
efficiency,
a $114,000 decrease in our inventory adjustments due to a higher emphasis
on
inventory accuracy, partially offset by a $2.0 million increase in
standard COGS
from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005 due to higher product revenue and sales
mix.
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, there was only an $84,000, favorable,
impact on net COGS due to deferrals of the COGS related to the deferral
of
product revenue in prior periods where return rights had not lapsed
as of the
end of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004.
Our
gross
profit from continuing operations was 52.8 percent in fiscal 2005 compared
to
41.4 percent in fiscal 2004. The increase in gross profit is mostly
due to the
increase in revenue of professional conferencing products which has
a higher
gross margin than our premium and tabletop conferencing products. The
increase
in gross profit was also impacted by reduced inventory write-offs,
cost cutting,
and improved efficiencies.
Operating
Expenses
Our
operating expenses were $18.1 million in fiscal 2005, a decrease of
$5.5
million, or 23.2 percent, from $23.6 million in fiscal 2004. The decrease
in
operating expenses from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005 is primarily related
to a
decrease in expenses related to the settlement in the shareholders’ class action
and other general and administrative expenses partially offset by increased
marketing and selling and research and product development employee-related
expenses. The following is a more detailed discussion of expenses related
to
marketing and selling, general and administrative, settlement in shareholders’
class action, research and product development, and impairment and
restructuring
charges.
36
Marketing
and selling expenses.
Marketing and selling expenses include selling, customer service, and
marketing
expenses such as employee-related costs, allocations of overhead expenses,
trade
shows, and other advertising and selling expenses. Total marketing
and selling
expenses increased $573,000, or 6.7 percent, to $9.1 million in fiscal
2005
compared with fiscal 2004 expenses of $8.5 million. As a percentage
of revenues,
marketing and selling expenses were 28.7 percent in fiscal 2005 and
30.4 percent
in fiscal 2004. The increase in marketing and selling expenses from
fiscal 2004
to fiscal 2005 was primarily attributable to an increase in U.S. and
Asia
employee-related expenses of $581,000 associated with the hiring of
additional
sales positions and increased benefits-related costs, severance payments
of
$175,000 to the former employees of the Germany office, as well as
early buyout
costs on leased office space and automobiles of $78,000 associated
with the
closure of our Germany office partially offset by a decrease of $193,000
in our
marketing department due to a change in the non-employee related expense
structure of the department after the departure of our Vice-President
of
Marketing.
General
and administrative expenses.
G&A
expenses include employee-related costs, professional service fees,
allocations
of overhead expenses, litigation costs, including costs associated
with the SEC
investigation and subsequent litigation, and corporate administrative
costs,
including finance and human resources. Total G&A expenses decreased $1.3
million, or 18.9 percent, to $5.5 million in fiscal 2005 compared with
fiscal
2004 expenses of $6.8 million. As a percentage of revenues, G&A expenses
were 17.3 percent in fiscal 2005 and 24.2 percent in fiscal 2004.
Year
Ended June 30,
|
|||||||
(in
thousands)
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Total
G&A before discontinued operations
|
$
|
5,742
|
$
|
9,703
|
|||
OM
Video G&A
|
(253
|
)
|
(1,113
|
)
|
|||
Conferencing
services G&A
|
-
|
(1,036
|
)
|
||||
U.S.
business services G&A
|
-
|
(787
|
)
|
||||
Total
G&A from continuing operations
|
$
|
5,489
|
$
|
6,767
|
|||
Professional
fees (SEC investigation and subsequent litigation)
|
$
|
997
|
$
|
936
|
|||
Professional
fees (Other)
|
1,993
|
1,944
|
|||||
Severance
payments to executives
|
-
|
544
|
|||||
Other
general and administrative expense
|
2,499
|
3,343
|
|||||
Total
G&A from continuing operations
|
$
|
5,489
|
$
|
6,767
|
We
attribute the decrease in G&A as a percentage of revenues to 17.3 percent in
2005 from 24.2 percent in 2004 to a decrease of $544,000 for severance
payments
to executives partially offset by a $61,000 increase in professional
fees
associated with the SEC investigation and subsequent litigation and
a $49,000
increase in other professional fees, including accounting and audit
fees. Other
G&A expense decreased an additional $844,000 mostly due to a reduction
in
salaries and benefits-related costs of $771,000, reflecting an average
headcount
of 33 and 19 for fiscal 2004 and 2005, respectively, as well as a decrease
in
directors and officers insurance premiums of $106,000.
Settlement
in shareholders’ class action expense.
We
attribute the decrease in settlement in shareholders’ class action expense as a
percentage of revenue to (6.5) percent in 2005 from 14.6 percent in
2004 to a
$6.1 million reduction to a quarterly mark-to-market of the liability
associated
with the 1.2 million shares of common stock that were issued in November
2004
(fiscal 2005) and September 2005 (fiscal 2006) to class members and
their legal
counsel as part of the December 2003 (fiscal 2004) settlement agreement.
This
mark-to-market of the stock to reflect the current liability amount
associated
with the 1.2 million shares is based upon the closing price of the
Company’s
common stock at the end of each quarter until the shares were
issued.
37
Research
and product development expenses.
Research
and product development expenses include research and development,
product
management, and engineering services, and test and application expenses,
including employee-related costs, outside services, expensed materials,
depreciation, and an allocation of overhead expenses. Total research
and product
development expenses increased $1.1 million, or 25.2 percent, to $5.3
million in
fiscal 2005 compared with fiscal 2004 expenses of $4.2 million. As
a percentage
of revenues, research and product development expenses were 16.8 percent
in
fiscal 2005 and 15.2 percent in fiscal 2004. The increase in product
development
expenses from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005 was due to an increase in
salaries and
benefit-related costs of $1.3 million associated with the hiring of
additional
personnel and development costs associated with new product development,
reflecting an average headcount of 31 and 39 for fiscal 2004 and 2005,
respectively, and an increase in depreciation expense of $69,000 associated
with
the purchase of computer hardware and software in relation to product
development, partially offset by a decrease research and development
material-related expense of $188,000 and a reduction in professional
services of
$87,000.
Impairment
and Restructuring
charges.
During
fiscal 2005, we recorded an impairment charge of $180,000 and a restructuring
charge of $110,000, shown as a restructuring reserve on the balance
sheet,
during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005 as a result of our outsourcing
of our
Salt Lake City manufacturing operations. The impairment charge consisted
of the
disposal of certain property and equipment of $180,000 that was not
purchased by
our domestic manufacturer and that we did not believe was likely to
be sold. The
restructuring charge consisted of severance and other employee termination
benefits of $70,000 related to a workforce reduction of approximately
20
employees who were transferred to an employment agency used by this
manufacturer
to transition the workforce and charges of $40,000 related to our manufacturing
facilities that we would no longer use.
Operating
loss.
For
fiscal 2005, our operating loss decreased $10.6 million, or 88.2 percent,
to
$1.4 million on revenue of $31.6 million, from an operating loss of
$12.0
million on revenue of $28.0 million in fiscal 2004. The factors affecting
this
decrease in operating loss were a decrease in general and administrative
expenses of $1.3 million, a decreased in settlement in shareholders’ class
action of $6.1 million, and an increase in gross profit of $5.1 million,
partially offset by an increase in research and product development
expenses of
$1.1 million, an increase in marketing and selling expenses of $573,000,
and a
restructuring and related impairment charge of $290,000 related to
our decision
to outsource our U.S. product manufacturing.
Other
income (expense), net.
Other
income (expense), net, includes our interest income, interest expense,
capital
gains, gain (loss) on the disposal of assets, and currency gain (loss).
Other
income was $318,000 in fiscal 2005, an increase of $579,000, or 221.8
percent,
from expense of ($261,000) in fiscal 2004. The increase in other income
in
fiscal 2005 was primarily due to an increase in interest income associated
with
our marketable securities, a decrease in interest expense related to
our early
pay-off of the Oracle system-related note payable, and a loss of approximately
$113,000 on the disposal of certain property and equipment that was
not repeated
in fiscal 2005.
Net
loss from continuing operations before income taxes.
Net loss
from continuing operations decreased $11.2 million, or 91.1 percent
to $1.1
million in fiscal 2005 compared with fiscal 2004 net loss from continuing
operations of $12.3 million. As a percentage of revenues, net loss
from
continuing operations was 3.5 percent in fiscal 2005 and 43.8 percent
in fiscal
2004. We attribute the change in loss to the results of operations
as described
above.
Benefit
for income taxes.
Benefit
for income taxes from continuing operations was $3.2 million in fiscal
2005 and
$736,000 in fiscal 2004. The benefit for income taxes from continuing
operations
from fiscal 2005 resulted primarily from a change in the valuation
allowance of
$2.6 million attributable to continuing operations that offset gains
from
discontinued operations and from the decrease in deferred tax assets.
Certain
income and expenses in our consolidated statements of operations are
either not
includable or not deductible for income tax purposes. These items include
tax-exempt interest, research and development credits, sale of our
investment in
OM Video, impairment charges, certain meals and entertainment expenses,
and
certain goodwill amortization. In addition, during fiscal 2005, the
Company’s
net deferred tax assets decreased and, therefore, the valuation allowance
needed
to offset this balance decreased creating a benefit to the Company’s tax
provision. Given the Company’s history of consecutive years of losses from
continuing operations, we followed the guidance of SFAS 109, “Accounting
for Income Taxes,”
and
recorded a valuation allowance against certain deferred tax assets
where it is
not considered more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will
be
realized. As of June 30, 2005 and 2004, we have fully reserved against
our net
deferred tax assets.
38
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax. Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax, includes our Canadian
audiovisual integration services business which was sold on March 4,
2005, our
conferencing services segment which was sold on July 1, 2004, our U.S.
audiovisual integration services business which was sold on May 6,
2004, and
payments received on our note receivable and commissions related to
the sale of
our remote control product line to Burk Technology in April 2001. The
income
from discontinued operations was $13.9 million in fiscal 2005, an increase
of
$12.3 million or 753.1 percent, from $1.6 million in fiscal 2004.
OM
Video
audiovisual integration services business revenue was $3.8 million
in fiscal
2005, a decrease of $2.1 million, from revenue of $5.9 million in fiscal
2004
due to revenue in fiscal 2005 being generated over an eight-month period
versus
a twelve-month period in fiscal 2004. OM Video services income, net
of tax, was
$401,000 for fiscal 2005, an increase of $184,000, from income, net
of tax, of
$217,000 in fiscal 2004. The increase was mostly due to a $227,000
post-tax gain
on the sale of OM Video being partially offset by decrease from post-tax
income
of $43,000 in fiscal 2005 over fiscal 2004. (see Discontinued
Operations
below.)
Conferencing
services business revenue was $0 in fiscal 2005, a decrease of $15.6
million,
from revenue of $15.6 million in fiscal 2004 due to the sale of conferencing
services on the first day of fiscal 2005. (see Discontinued
Operations
below).
Conferencing services income, net of tax, was $13.4 million for fiscal
2005, an
increase of $11.6 million, from income, net of tax, of $1.8 million
in fiscal
2004. The income, net of tax, in fiscal 2005 included the gain on disposal
of
discontinued operations, while the income, net of tax, in fiscal 2004
included
income from discontinued operations.
U.S.
audiovisual integration services business revenue was $0 in fiscal
2005, a
decrease of $3.6 million, from revenue of $3.6 million in fiscal 2004.
Since
this segment was sold in May 2004, U.S. audiovisual integration services
business loss, net of tax, was $0 in fiscal 2005, a decrease of $399,000,
from a
loss, net of tax, of ($399,000) in fiscal 2004. There was no activity
related to
our U.S. audiovisual integration services business in fiscal 2005.
(see
Discontinued
Operations
below.)
We
realized a gain, net of tax, on the Burk sale of $144,000 for fiscal
2005, an
increase of $86,000, from a gain, net of tax, of $58,000 in fiscal
2004. The
increase was due to quarterly payments from Burk on the promissory
note.
Fiscal
Year Ended June 30, 2004 (“Fiscal 2004”)
Compared
to Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2003 (“Fiscal 2003”)
Revenue
For
the
fiscal years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, revenues by business segment
were as
follows:
Year
Ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
|||||||||||||
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||||||
%
of Revenue
|
%
of Revenue
|
||||||||||||
Product
|
$
|
27,836
|
99.5%
|
|
$
|
27,512
|
96.3%
|
|
|||||
Business
services
|
130
|
0.5%
|
|
1,054
|
3.7%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
27,966
|
100.0%
|
|
$
|
28,566
|
100.0%
|
|
Product.
Product
revenue increased $324,000, or 1.2 percent, in fiscal 2004 compared
to fiscal
2003. The increase in revenue was primarily due to introducing new
product
lines, which include the MAX and XAP® products. During the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2004, we recognized $5.2 million in revenues and $1.7 million
in cost
of goods sold that were deferred in prior periods since cash had not
been
collected as of the end of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. As of June
30, 2004, we deferred $6.2 million in revenues and $2.4 million in
cost of goods
sold related to invoices sold where return rights had not lapsed.
39
The
following table relates to individual unit shipments to our distributors
for
certain of our product lines for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2004
and 2003
and due to our current revenue recognition policy will not tie directly
to
recognized revenues:
Year
Ended June 30,
|
||
(by
individual unit)
|
||
2004
|
2003
|
|
Professional
audio conferencing
|
10,576
|
7,166
|
Premium
and tabletop conferencing
|
9,813
|
-
|
Business
Services.
Business
services revenue decreased $924,000, or 87.7 percent, in fiscal 2004
compared to
fiscal 2003. During fiscal 2003, we recognized revenue due to the sale
of a
software license associated with our telephone interface products to
Comrex with
a value of $1.1 million while we recognized $130,000 in fiscal
2004.
Total
Revenue.
Total
revenue decreased $600,000, or 2.1 percent, in fiscal 2004 compared
to fiscal
2003. The overall decrease in revenue during fiscal 2004 was primarily
attributable to a one-time sale of $1.1 million of software license
in our
business services segment during fiscal 2003, partially offset by an
increase in
product revenue. Product revenue from sales outside of the United States
accounted for 22.7 percent of total revenue for fiscal 2004 and 32.3
percent of
total revenue for fiscal 2003.
Costs
of Goods Sold and Gross Profit
Costs
of
goods sold (“COGS”) from the product segment includes expenses associated with
finished goods purchased from outsourced manufacturers, the manufacture
of our
products, including material and direct labor, our manufacturing and
operations
organization, tooling amortization, warranty expense, freight expense,
royalty
payments, and the allocation of overhead expenses.
Year
Ended June 30,
|
|||||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
|||||||||||||
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||||||
%
of Revenue
|
%
of Revenue
|
||||||||||||
Cost
of goods sold
|
|||||||||||||
Product
|
$
|
16,379
|
58.6%
|
|
$
|
18,115
|
63.4%
|
|
|||||
Business
services
|
-
|
0.0%
|
|
-
|
0.0%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
16,379
|
58.6%
|
|
$
|
18,115
|
63.4%
|
|
|||||
Gross
profit
|
|||||||||||||
Product
|
$
|
11,457
|
41.0%
|
|
$
|
9,397
|
32.9%
|
|
|||||
Business
services
|
130
|
0.4%
|
|
1,054
|
3.7%
|
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
11,587
|
41.4%
|
|
$
|
10,451
|
36.6%
|
|
COGS
decreased by approximately $1.7 million, or 9.6 percent, to $16.4 million
in
fiscal 2004 compared with $18.1 million in fiscal 2003. The decrease
in COGS
from fiscal 2003 to fiscal 2004 was primarily attributable to a $1.6
million
decrease in standard COGS due to higher product revenue and sales mix,
partially
offset by a $521,000 increase in our obsolete inventory write-offs.
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004, there was a $643,000 favorable
impact on
net COGS due to change in deferrals of product revenue related to cash
collection during fiscal 2003 to the deferrals of COGS related to the
deferral
of product revenue where return rights had not lapsed as of the end
of the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2004.
Our
gross
profit from continuing operations was 41.4 percent in fiscal 2004 compared
to
36.6 percent in fiscal 2003. The increase in gross profit was impacted
by
reduced material costs and improvements in inventory accuracy, cost
cutting, and
efficiencies.
40
Operating
Expenses
Our
operating expenses were $23.6 million in fiscal 2004, a decrease of
$5.1
million, or 17.8 percent, from $28.7 million in fiscal 2003. The decrease
in
operating expenses from fiscal 2003 to fiscal 2004 is primarily related
to a
decrease in impairment losses and SEC investigation and subsequent
litigation-related expenses partially offset by increased marketing
and selling
and research and product development expenses. The following is a more
detailed
discussion of expenses related to marketing and selling, general and
administrative, settlement in shareholders’ class action, research and product
development, and impairment losses.
Marketing
and selling expenses.
Marketing and selling expenses include selling, customer service, and
marketing
expenses such as employee-related costs, allocations of overhead expenses,
trade
shows, and other advertising and selling expenses. Total marketing
and selling
expenses increased $1.4 million, or 20.2 percent, to $8.5 million in
fiscal 2004
compared with fiscal 2003 expenses of $7.1 million. As a percentage
of revenues,
marketing and selling expenses were 30.4 percent in fiscal 2004 and
24.7 percent
in fiscal 2003. The increase in marketing and selling expenses from
fiscal 2003
to fiscal 2004 was primarily attributable to an increase in our United
Kingdom
sales operations, as well as an increase in U.S. employee-related expenses
due
to an increase of nine employees in the marketing and sales departments
at the
end of fiscal 2004 over fiscal 2003.
General
and administrative expenses.
G&A
expenses include employee-related costs, professional service fees,
allocations
of overhead expenses, litigation costs, including costs associated
with the SEC
investigation and subsequent litigation, and corporate administrative
costs,
including finance and human resources. Total G&A expenses increased
$852,000, or 14.4 percent, to $6.8 million in fiscal 2004 compared
with fiscal
2003 expenses of $5.9 million. As a percentage of revenues, G&A expenses
were 24.2 percent in fiscal 2004 and 20.7 percent in fiscal 2003.
Year
Ended June 30,
|
|||||||
(in
thousands)
|
|||||||
2004
|
2003
|
||||||
Total
G&A before discontinued operations
|
$
|
9,703
|
$
|
9,798
|
|||
OM
Video G&A
|
(1,113
|
)
|
(1,270
|
)
|
|||
Conferencing
services G&A
|
(1,036
|
)
|
(972
|
)
|
|||
U.S.
business services G&A
|
(787
|
)
|
(1,641
|
)
|
|||
Total
G&A from continuing operations
|
$
|
6,767
|
$
|
5,915
|
|||
Professional
fees (SEC investigation and subsequent litigation)
|
$
|
936
|
$
|
1,844
|
|||
Professional
fees (Other)
|
1,944
|
1,270
|
|||||
Severance
payments to executives
|
544
|
-
|
|||||
Other
general and administrative expense
|
3,343
|
2,801
|
|||||
Total
G&A from continuing operations
|
$
|
6,767
|
$
|
5,915
|
We
attribute the increase in G&A as a percentage of revenues from 20.7 percent
in 2003 to 24.2 percent in 2004 mainly to an increase in other professional
fees, including accounting and audit fees, of $674,000 and an increase
in
severance payments to executives of $544,000 partially offset by a
$908,000
reduction in professional fees associated with the SEC investigation
and
subsequent litigation. Additionally, other G&A expenses increased $542,000
mostly due to an increase of $231,000 in directors and officers insurance
premiums, an increase of $219,000 in salaries and benefits-related
costs, an
increase of $160,000 in compensation expense associated with modifications
to
certain stock option agreements, an increase of $110,000 in payments
to
directors due to an increase in the number of meetings and additional
interaction with the Company, and an increase of $57,000 in corporate
travel
expense partially offset by a decrease in the day-to-day operations
associated
with our Ireland office of $237,000.
41
Settlement
of shareholders’ class action expenses.
The $4.1
million in settlement in shareholders’ class action expenses during fiscal 2004
related to a quarterly mark-to-market of the liability associated with
the 1.2
million shares of common stock to be issued to class members and their
legal
counsel as part of the December 2003 settlement agreement. This mark-to-market
of the stock to reflect the current liability amount associated with
the 1.2
million shares based upon the closing price of the Company’s common stock at the
end of each quarter will continue on a quarterly basis until the shares
are
actually issued. The $7.3 million in settlement in shareholders’ class action
expenses during fiscal 2003 related to the original $2.5 million liability
associated with the 1.2 million shares of common stock to be issued
as well as
an expense of $4.8 million for the cash settlement.
Research
and product development expenses.
Research
and product development expenses include research and development,
product
management, engineering services, and test and application expenses,
including
employee-related costs, outside services, expensed materials, depreciation,
and
an allocation of overhead expenses. Total research and product development
expenses increased $956,000, or 29.1 percent, to $4.2 million in fiscal
2004
compared with fiscal 2003 expenses of $3.3 million. As a percentage
of revenues,
research and product development expenses were 15.2 percent in fiscal
2004 and
11.5 percent in fiscal 2003. The increase in product development expenses
from
fiscal 2003 to fiscal 2004 was due to increased salaries and expenses
associated
with additional personnel and development costs associated with new
audio
conferencing product development, including products in the XAP, RAV,
and MAX
families, as well as the next generation ceiling document camera.
Impairment
losses.
In
fiscal 2003, impairment charges related to the conferencing furniture
manufacturing business totaled $58,000 for property and equipment and
$5.0
million for goodwill and intangible assets. We entered into the conferencing
furniture manufacturing business through the E.mergent acquisition
in fiscal
2002. The estimated fair value of the reporting unit, for purposes
of evaluating
goodwill for impairment, was less than its carrying values. Additionally,
the
estimated undiscounted future cash flows generated by certain other
long-lived
assets, excluding goodwill, was less than its carrying value. The impairment
analysis performed in accordance with SFAS No. 142 and SFAS No. 144,
resulted in
an impairment loss of $5.1 million for the fiscal year ended June 30,
2003.
Management estimated the fair value of the reporting unit using third-party
appraisals. Management estimated the fair market value of the long-lived
assets,
excluding goodwill, using the present value of expected future discounted
cash
flows.
Operating
loss.
For
fiscal 2004, our operating loss decreased $6.2 million, or 34.3 percent,
to
$12.0 million on revenue of $28.0 million, from an operating loss of
$18.2
million on revenue of $28.6 million in fiscal 2003. The factors affecting
this
decrease in operating loss were a decrease in impairment charges for
goodwill
and other long-lived assets of $5.1 million, a decrease in settlement
in
shareholders’ class action expenses of $3.2 million, and an increase in gross
profit of $1.1 million, partially offset by an increase in marketing
and selling
expenses of $1.4 million, an increase in general and administrative
expenses of
$852,000, and an increase in research and product development expenses
of
$956,000.
Other
income (expense), net.
Other
income (expense), net, includes our interest income, interest expense,
capital
gains, gain (loss) on the disposal of assets, and currency gain (loss).
Other
expense was ($261,000) in fiscal 2004, an increase of $309,000, or
643.8
percent, from income of $48,000 in fiscal 2003. The increase in other
expense in
fiscal 2004 was primarily due to an increase in interest expense related
to our
Oracle system-related note payable and an approximate $113,000 loss
on disposal
of certain property and equipment.
Net
loss from continuing operations before income taxes.
Net loss
from continuing operations decreased $5.9 million, or 32.6 percent
to $12.3
million in fiscal 2004 compared with fiscal 2003 net loss from continuing
operations of $18.2 million. As a percentage of revenues, net loss
from
continuing operations was 43.8 percent in fiscal 2004 and 63.7 percent
in fiscal
2003. We attribute the change in loss to the results of operations
as described
above.
42
Benefit
for income taxes.
Benefit
for income taxes from continuing operations was $736,000 in fiscal
2004 and $1.4
million in fiscal 2003. The benefit for income taxes from fiscal 2004
and 2003
resulted primarily from losses from continuing operations that were
available
for carryback for tax refunds from prior years that were partially
offset by
changes in the valuation allowance. Certain income and expenses in
our
consolidated statements of operations are either not includable or
not
deductible for income tax purposes. These items include tax-exempt
interest,
research and development credits, impairment charges, certain meals
and
entertainment expenses, and certain goodwill amortization. During fiscal
2004
and 2003, we increased our deferred tax asset valuation allowance attributable
to losses for which no tax benefit is recorded. The combined effects
of the
non-includable income, non-deductible expenses, and changes in the
valuation
allowance were the primary reasons for our tax benefit being different
from the
expected tax benefit (expense). Given the Company’s history of consecutive years
of losses from continuing operations, we followed the guidance of SFAS
109,
“Accounting
for Income Taxes,”
and
recorded a valuation allowance against certain deferred tax assets
where it is
not considered more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will
be
realized. As of June 30, 2004, we have fully reserved against our net
deferred
tax assets.
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax. Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax, includes our Canadian
audiovisual integration services business which was sold on March 4,
2005, our
conferencing services segment which was sold on July 1, 2004, our U.S.
audiovisual integration services business which was sold on May 6,
2004, and
payments received on our note receivable and commissions related to
the sale of
our remote control product line to Burk Technology in April 2001. The
income
from discontinued operations was $1.6 million in fiscal 2004, an increase
of
$20.8 million or 108.5 percent, from a ($19.1 million) loss in fiscal
2003.
OM
Video
audiovisual integration services business revenue was $5.9 million
in fiscal
2004, a decrease of $183,000, from revenue of $6.1 million in fiscal
2003. OM
Video services income, net of tax, was $217,000 for fiscal 2004, an
increase of
$8.3 million, from income, net of tax, of ($8.1 million) in fiscal
2003. The
decrease in the loss was primarily due to an impairment charge of $8.4
million
in fiscal 2003 not being repeated in fiscal 2004 and a reduction in
new Canadian
business services contracts as the Company deemphasized the Canadian
audiovisual
integration services business. (see Discontinued
Operations
below).
Conferencing
services business revenue was $15.6 million in fiscal 2004, an increase
of
$310,000, from revenue of $15.3 million in fiscal 2003. Conferencing
services
income, net of tax, was $1.8 million for fiscal 2004, a decrease of
$354,000,
from income, net of tax, of $2.1 million in fiscal 2003. The decrease
was mostly
due to increased marketing and selling expenses partially offset by
increased
gross profit. (see Discontinued
Operations
below).
U.S.
audiovisual integration services business revenue was $3.6 million
in fiscal
2004, a decrease of $4.0 million, from revenue of $7.6 million in fiscal
2003.
U.S. audiovisual integration services business loss, net of tax, was
($399,000)
in fiscal 2004, a decrease of $13.0 million, from a loss, net of tax,
of ($13.4)
million in fiscal 2003. The decrease in the loss was mostly due to
an impairment
charge of $12.5 million in fiscal 2003 not being repeated in fiscal
2004 and a
reduction in new U.S. business services contracts being pursued. (see
Discontinued
Operations
below).
We
realized a gain, net of tax, on the Burk sale of $58,000 for fiscal
2004, a
decrease of $142,000, from a gain, net of tax, of $200,000 in fiscal
2003. The
decrease was due to Burk deferring payments on the promissory note
based on
their quarterly net sales not meeting levels established within the
agreement.
EFFECT
ON THE COMPANY FROM ACQUISITIONS AND SUBSEQUENT RELATED
DISPOSITIONS
During
the fiscal years ended June 30, 2003, 2002, and 2001, we acquired four
different
companies with the intention of expanding our operations to include
the
development, manufacture, and distribution of video conferencing products
as
well as adding an audiovisual integration business services segment
to our
business. See Item 1. Description of Business. Acquisitions
and Dispositions
and the
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004
for more
details. Total consideration paid in cash and through the issuance
of common
stock to acquire these companies was approximately $39.9 million.
43
As
a
result of the impairment tests performed effective as of the end of
fiscal 2003
and fiscal 2002 according to SFAS No. 121, 142, and 144, we recorded
impairment
charges for all goodwill, a portion of purchased intangibles, and substantially
all property and equipment for each entity. Impairment losses totaled
approximately $33.1 million on our statements from continuing and discontinued
operations. Between the end of fiscal 2002 and the third quarter of
fiscal 2005,
we had disposed of or abandoned substantially all the assets and operations
of
the four acquired companies due to technology issues and the lack of
market
success. We experienced a significant decrease in revenue associated
with the
dispositions and related cost and expenses. See Item 1. Description
of Business.
Subsequent
Events
and
Discontinued
Operations
below
for more details.
We
have
refocused our organization on our original core competency, which is
where we
intend to keep our focus for the foreseeable future. Our current plans
are to
invest in research and product development to release new products
that are
in-line with our core competencies and that complement our existing
product
lines.
DISCONTINUED
OPERATIONS
Burk
Technology, Inc.
On
April
12, 2001, we sold the assets of the remote control portion of our RFM/Broadcast
division to Burk Technology, Inc. (“Burk”) for $750,000 in cash at closing, $1.8
million in the form of a seven-year promissory note, with interest
at the rate
of 9.0 percent per year, and up to $700,000 as a commission over a
period of up
to seven years. The payments on the promissory note could be deferred
based upon
Burk not meeting net quarterly sales levels established within the
agreement. We
realized a pre-tax gain on the sale of $187,000 for fiscal 2005, $93,000
for
fiscal 2004, and $318,000 for fiscal 2003. As of June 30, 2005, $1.5
million of the promissory note remained outstanding and we had received
$20,000
in commissions.
On
August
22, 2005, we entered into a Mutual Release and Waiver Agreement with
Burk
pursuant to which Burk paid us $1.3 million in full satisfaction of
the
promissory note, which included a discount of $119,000. As part of
the Mutual
Release and Waiver Agreement, we waived any right to future commission
payments
from Burk and we granted mutual releases to one another with respect
to claims
and liabilities. Accordingly, the total pre-tax gain on the disposal
of
discontinued operations, related to Burk, was approximately $2.4
million.
M:Space,
Inc. - U.S. Audiovisual Integration Services
During
the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003, we decided
to stop
pursuing new U.S. business services contracts and impaired the U.S.
acquired
business services assets. We did not prepare any formal disposition
plan and
existing customers continued to be serviced. We decided to sell the
U.S.
audiovisual integrations services because many of our existing systems
integrators and value-added resellers perceived our entry into the
business
services arena as a threat since we began competing against these same
customers
for sales, as well as our desire to return to our core competency in
the audio
conferencing products segment. U.S. audiovisual integration services
revenue,
reported in discontinued operations, were $3.6 million in fiscal 2004
and $7.6
million in fiscal 2003. U.S. audiovisual integration services pretax
(loss)
income, reported in discontinued operations, were ($360,000) for the
year ended
June 30, 2004 and ($14.1 million) for the year ended June 30, 2003.
On
May 6,
2004, we sold certain assets of our U.S. audiovisual integration services
operations to M:Space, Inc. (“M:Space”) for no cash compensation. M:Space is a
privately held audiovisual integration services company. In exchange
for M:Space
assuming obligations for completion of certain customer contracts and
satisfying
maintenance contract obligations to existing customers, we transferred
to
M:Space certain assets including inventory valued at $573,000. We realized
a
pre-tax loss on the sale of $276,000 for the fiscal year ended June
30, 2004.
Conferencing
Services
In
April
2004, our Board of Directors appointed a committee to explore sales
opportunities to sell the conferencing services business component.
We decided
to sell this component primarily because of decreasing margins and
investments
in equipment that we believed would have been required in the near
future.
Conferencing services revenue, reported in discontinued operations,
were $15.6
million in fiscal 2004 and $15.3 million in fiscal 2003. Conferencing
services
pretax income, reported in discontinued operations, were $2.8 million
for the
year ended June 30, 2004 and $3.4 million for the year ended June 30,
2003.
44
On
July
1, 2004, we sold our conferencing services business segment to Premiere.
Consideration for the sale consisted of $21.3 million in cash. Of the
purchase
price $300,000 was placed into a working capital escrow account and
an
additional $1.0 million was placed into an 18-month Indemnity Escrow
account. We
received the $300,000 working capital escrow funds approximately 90
days after
the execution date of the contract. We received the $1.0 million in
the
Indemnity Escrow account in January 2006. Additionally, $1.4 million
of the
proceeds was utilized to pay off equipment leases pertaining to assets
being
conveyed to Premiere. We realized a pre-tax gain on the sale of $17.4
million
during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005.
OM
Video - Canadian Audiovisual Integration Services
During
the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003, we deemphasized
the
audiovisual integration market serving the Ottawa, Canada region and
impaired
the OM Video acquired business services assets. We did not prepare
any formal
disposition plan. During fiscal 2005, we decided to sell all the issued
and
outstanding stock of our Canadian subsidiary because many of our existing
systems integrators and value-added resellers perceived our entry into
the
business services arena as a threat since we began competing against
these same
customers for sales, as well as our desire to return to our core competency
in
the audio conferencing products segment.
In
December 2004, a group of investors approached us about a possible
purchase of
OM Video. On January 27, 2005, our Board of Directors authorized our
Chief
Executive Officer to continue discussions regarding a stock sale of
OM Video,
our Canadian audiovisual integration services business component. We
decided to
sell this component after we deemphasized Canadian Business Services
contracts.
OM Video revenues, reported in discontinued operations, for the years
ended June
30, 2005, 2004, and 2003 were $3.8 million, $5.9 million, and $6.1
million,
respectively. OM Video pre-tax income (loss), reported in discontinued
operations, for the years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, were
$225,000,
$373,000, and ($8.1 million), respectively.
On
March
4, 2005, the Company sold all of the issued and outstanding stock of
its
Canadian subsidiary, ClearOne Communications of Canada, Inc. (“ClearOne Canada”)
to 6351352 Canada Inc., a Canada corporation. ClearOne Canada owned
all the
issued and outstanding stock of Stechyson Electronics, Ltd., which
conducts
business under the name OM Video. The Company agreed to sell the stock
of
ClearOne Canada for $200,000 in cash; a $1.3 million note payable over
a
15-month period, with interest accruing on the unpaid balance at the
rate of 5.3
percent per year; and contingent consideration ranging from 3.0 percent
to 4.0
percent of related gross revenues over a five-year period. In June
2005, we were
advised that the OM Purchaser had settled an action brought by a former
employer
of certain of OM Purchaser’s owners and employees alleging violation of
non-competition agreements. The settlement reportedly involved a cash
payment
and an agreement not to sell certain products for a period of one year.
Based on
an analysis of the facts and circumstances that existed on March 4,
2005, and
considering the guidance from Topic 5U of the SEC Rules and Regulations,
“Gain
Recognition on the Sale of a Business or Operating Assets to a Highly
Leveraged
Entity,” the gain is being recognized as cash is collected. The Company realized
a pre-tax gain on the sale of $295,000 for the fiscal year ended June
30, 2005.
As of December 31, 2005, all payments had been received and $854,000
of the
promissory note remained outstanding; however, OM Purchaser failed
to make any
subsequent, required payments under the note receivable. We are currently
considering our collection options.
SALE
OF OTHER ASSETS
Sale
of Broadcast Telephone Interface Product Line
On
August
23, 2002, we entered into an agreement with Comrex Corporation (“Comrex”). In
exchange for $1.3 million, Comrex received certain inventory associated
with our
broadcast telephone interface product line, a perpetual software license
to use
our technology related to broadcast telephone interface products along
with one
free year of maintenance and support, and transition services for 90
days
following the effective date of the agreement. The transition services
included
training, engineering assistance, consultation, and development services.
During
the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, we recognized
$0,
$130,000, and $1.1 million, respectively, in business services revenue
related
to this transaction.
45
We
also
entered into a manufacturing agreement to continue to manufacture additional
product for Comrex for one year following the agreement described above
on a
when-and-if needed basis. Comrex agreed to pay us for any additional
product on
a per item basis of cost plus 30 percent. Given the future revenue
stream
associated with each unit produced, revenue will be recognized when-and-if
received. During the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004 and 2003,
we have
recognized $0, $387,000, and $783,000, respectively, in product revenue
related
to the manufacture of additional product from Comrex.
SUBSEQUENT
EVENTS
The
Shareholders’ Class Action. On
May
23, 2005, the court order was amended to require us to pay cash in
lieu of stock
to those members of the class who would otherwise have been entitled
to receive
fewer than 100 shares of stock. On September 29, 2005, we completed
our
obligations under the settlement agreement by issuing a total of 1,148,494
shares of our common stock to the plaintiff class, including 228,000
shares
previously issued in November 2004, and we paid an aggregate of $127,000
in cash
in lieu of shares to those members of the class who would otherwise
have been
entitled to receive an odd-lot number of shares or who resided in states
in
which there was no exemption available for the issuance of shares.
The cash
payments were calculated on the basis of $2.46 per share which was
equal to the
higher of (i) the closing price for our common stock as reported by
the Pink
Sheets on the business day prior to the date the shares were mailed,
or (ii) the
average closing price over the five trading days prior to such mailing
date.
Third-Party
Manufacturing Agreement.
On
August 1, 2005, we entered into a Manufacturing Agreement with a third-party
manufacturer (“TPM”), pursuant to which we agreed to outsource our Salt Lake
City manufacturing operations. The agreement is for an initial term
of three
years, which shall automatically be extended for successive and additional
terms
of one year each unless terminated by either party upon 120 days advance
notice
at any time after the second anniversary of the agreement. The agreement
generally provides, among other things, that TPM shall: (i) furnish
the
necessary personnel, material, equipment, services, and facilities
to be the
exclusive manufacturer of substantially all the products that were
previously
manufactured at our Salt Lake City, Utah manufacturing facility, and
the
non-exclusive manufacturer of a limited number of products, provided
that the
total cost to ClearOne (including price, quality, logistic cost, and
terms and
conditions of purchase) is competitive; (ii) provide repair service,
warranty
support, and proto-type services for new product introduction on terms
to be
agreed upon by the parties; (iii) purchase certain items of our manufacturing
equipment; (iv) lease certain other items of our manufacturing equipment
and
have a one-year option to purchase such leased items; (v) have the
right to
lease our former manufacturing employees from a third-party employee
leasing
company; and (vi) purchase the parts and materials on hand and in transit
at our
cost for such items with the purchase price payable on a monthly basis
when and
if such parts and materials are used by TPM. The parties also entered
into a
one-year sublease for approximately 12,000 square feet of manufacturing
space
located in our headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah, which sublease
may be
terminated by either party upon 90 days notice. The agreement provides
that
products shall be manufactured pursuant to purchase orders submitted
by us at
purchase prices to be agreed upon by the parties, subject to adjustment
based
upon such factors as volume, long range forecasts, change orders, etc.
We also
granted TPM a right of first refusal to manufacture new products developed
by us
at a cost to ClearOne (including price, quality, logistic cost, and
terms and
conditions of purchase) that is competitive. Costs associated with
outsourcing
our manufacturing totaled approximately $290,000 including severance
payments,
facilities we no longer use, and impairment of property and equipment
that will
be disposed of. We recorded the change related to these costs in the
June 30,
2005 consolidated financial statements.
Payoff
of Burk Note Receivable.
On
August 22, 2005 we entered into a Mutual Release and Waiver with Burk
pursuant
to which Burk paid us $1.3 million in full satisfaction of the promissory
note,
which included a discount of $119,000. As part of the Mutual Release
and Waiver
Agreement, we waived any right to future commission payments from Burk
and we
granted mutual releases to one another with respect to claims and liabilities.
Sale
of OM Video.
As of
December 31, 2005, all payments had been received and $854,000 of the
promissory
note remained outstanding; however, OM Purchaser failed to make any
subsequent,
required payments under the note receivable. We are currently considering
our
collection options.
Sale
of Conferencing Services.
In
January 2006, we received the $1.0 million in the Indemnity Escrow
account from
Premiere.
46
Settlement
Agreement and Release.
We
entered into a settlement agreement and release with our former Vice-President
-
Human Resources in connection with the cessation of her employment,
which
generally provided for her resignation from her position and employment,
the
payment of severance, and a general release of claims against us by
her. On
February 20, 2006, an agreement was entered into which generally provided
for a
severance payment of $93,300 and her surrender and delivery to the
Company of
145,000 stock options (86,853 of which were vested).
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
As
of
June 30, 2005, our cash and cash equivalents were approximately $1.9
million and
our marketable securities were approximately $15.8 million, which represented
an
overall increase of $11.7 million in our balances from June 30, 2004
which were
cash and cash equivalents of approximately $4.2 million and our marketable
securities of approximately $1.8 million. We had an overall decrease
of $2.3
million from our balances at June 30, 2003, which were cash and cash
equivalents
of approximately $6.1 million, restricted cash of approximately $200,000
and
marketable securities totaling approximately $1.9 million.
Net
cash
flows used in operating activities were $370,000 in fiscal 2005, a
decrease of
$1.5 million, from the net cash flows provided by operating activities
of $1.1
million in fiscal 2004. The decrease was attributable to a decrease
of $4.8
million in non-cash expenses from fiscal 2004, a decrease of $7.7 million
in
cash provided by changes in working capital, and a $2.6 million decrease
in cash
provided by discontinued operations, partially offset by an increase
in net
income from continuing operations of $13.7 million.
Net
cash
flows provided by operating activities were $1.1 million in fiscal
2004, a
decrease of $1.4 million, from the net cash flows provided by operating
activities of $2.5 million in fiscal 2003. The decrease was attributable
to a
decrease of $3.2 million in non-cash expenses from fiscal 2003, a decrease
of
$2.2 million in cash provided by changes in working capital, and a
$1.4 million
decrease in cash provided by discontinued operations, partially offset
by a
decrease in net loss from continuing operations of $5.3 million.
Net
cash
flows used in investing activities were $1.0 million in fiscal 2005,
a decrease
of $472,000, from the net cash flows used in investing activities of
$1.5
million in fiscal 2004. The decrease was primarily attributable to
an increase
in the net purchases of marketable securities of $14.2 million partially
offset
by an increase in cash provided by discontinued investing activities
of $14.3
million.
Net
cash
flows used in investing activities were $1.5 million in fiscal 2004,
a decrease
of $2.8 million, from the net cash flows provided by investing activities
of
$1.3 million in fiscal 2003. The decrease was primarily attributable
to a
reduction in the net sales of marketable securities of $10.3 million
partially
offset by a reduction in cash used in discontinued investing activities
of $7.5
million.
Net
cash
flows used in financing activities were $940,000 in fiscal 2005, a
decrease of
$577,000, from the net cash flows used in financing activities of $1.5
million
in fiscal 2004. This decrease was primarily attributable to a $770,000
decrease
in cash used in discontinued operations offset by an increase of payments
on
long-term debt and capital leases of $256,000.
Net
cash
flows used in financing activities were $1.5 million in fiscal 2004,
a decrease
of $2.0 million, from the net cash flows provided by financing activities
of
$465,000 in fiscal 2003. This decreased was primarily attributable
to a decrease
in new borrowings related to our Oracle Enterprise Resource Planning
implementation of $2.0 million partially offset by an increase of payments
on
long-term debt and capital leases of $209,000.
At
June
30, 2005, we had open purchase orders related to our contract manufacturers
and
other contractual obligations of approximately $3.1 million primarily
related to
inventory purchases.
47
We
have
no off-balance-sheet financing arrangements with related parties and
no
unconsolidated subsidiaries. Contractual obligations related to our
operating
leases at June 30, 2005 are summarized below (in thousands):
Payments
Due by Period
|
||||||||||||||||
Contractual
Obligations
|
Total
|
One
year
or
less
|
Two
to
Three
Years
|
Four
to
Five
Years
|
After
Five
Years
|
|||||||||||
Operating
Leases
|
$
|
736
|
$
|
494
|
$
|
240
|
$
|
2
|
$
|
-
|
||||||
Total
Contractual Cash Obligations
|
$ | 736 | $ | 494 | $ | 240 | $ | 2 | $ | - |
As
previously discussed, on March 4, 2005, we sold all of the issued and
outstanding stock of our Canadian subsidiary, ClearOne Communications
of Canada,
Inc. (“ClearOne Canada”) to 6351352 Canada Inc., a Canada corporation. ClearOne
Canada owned all the issued and outstanding stock of Stechyson Electronics,
Ltd., which conducts business under the name OM Video. For the first
two
quarters of fiscal 2006 and during all of fiscal 2005, we received
total
payments, including interest, of $300,000 and $150,000, respectively,
on the
note receivable. As of December 31, 2005, all payments had been received
and
$854,000 of the promissory note remained outstanding; however, OM Purchaser
failed to make any subsequent, required payments under the note receivable.
We
are currently considering our collection options.
As
discussed herein, on April 12, 2001, we sold the assets of the remote
control
portion of our RFM/Broadcast division to Burk Technology, Inc. (“Burk”) for
$750,000 in cash at closing, $1.8 million in the form of a seven-year
promissory
note, with interest at the rate of 9.0 percent per year, and up to
$700,000 as a
commission over a period of up to seven years. We realized a pre-tax
gain on the
sale of $187,000 for fiscal 2005, $93,000 for fiscal 2004, and $318,000
for
fiscal 2003.
As
detailed elsewhere in this filing, on July 1, 2004, we sold our conferencing
services business segment to Clarinet, Inc. an affiliate of American
Teleconferencing Services, Ltd. doing business as Premiere Conferencing
(“Premiere”) for $21.3 million. Of the purchase price, $1.0 million was placed
into an 18-month Indemnity Escrow account. We received the $1.0 million
in the
Indemnity Escrow account in January 2006.
As
of
June 30, 2005, we had an income tax receivable of $4.0 million. The
receivable
was generated from net operating loss carrybacks related to tax returns
for the
fiscal years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, of $3.1 million and $359,000,
respectively, and an overpayment of income taxes of approximately $500,000
for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005.
Beginning
in January 2003 and continuing through the date of this report, we
have incurred
significant costs with respect to the defense and settlement of legal
proceedings and the audits of our consolidated financial statements.
Restatement
of fiscal 2002 and fiscal 2001 consolidated financial statements and
the fiscal
2004 and fiscal 2003 audits were significantly more complex, time consuming,
and
expensive than we originally anticipated. The extended time commitment
required
to complete the restatement of financial information continues to be
costly and
divert our resources, as well as have a material effect on our results
of
operations. We paid $127,000 in fiscal 2006, $2.5 million in fiscal
2005, and
$2.5 million in fiscal 2004 in cash to settle the shareholders’ class action
lawsuit. We have incurred legal fees in the amount of approximately
$1.9 million
from January 2003 through the date hereof and we have incurred audit
and tax
fees in the amount of approximately $3.5 million from January 2004
through the
date hereof.
During
fiscal 2006, we increased our research and development spending for
new product
development, including the hiring of new engineering and support staff,
as well
as increased spending on software, hardware, prototype development
and testing.
We have also invested in the introduction of new products, including
the
Converge 560/590, the MaxAttach IP and Max IP, as well as the Tabletop
Controller for XAP Platform. We continue to evaluate our Salt Lake
City facility
versus locating a facility that may better meet our future requirements.
We
intend to invest capital resources into improving our infrastructure
and
potentially make additional leasehold improvements. We do not currently
anticipate using capital resources for shareholder dividends or for
significant
acquisition activities.
48
Our
principal source of funding for these and other expenses has been cash
generated
from operations and from the sale of discontinued operations. We believe
that
our working capital and cash flows from operating activities will be
sufficient
to satisfy our operating and capital expenditure requirements through
fiscal
2007.
ISSUED
BUT NOT YET ADOPTED ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment
In
March
2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Emerging Issues
Task Force (“EITF”) No. 03-01, “The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment
and its Application to Certain Investments,” which provides new guidance for
assessing impairment losses on debt and equity investments. The new
impairment
model applies to investments accounted for under the cost or equity
method and
investments accounted for under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(“SFAS”) 115, “Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity
Securities.” EITF No. 03-01 also includes new disclosure requirements for cost
method investments and for all investments that are in an unrealized
loss
position. In September 2004, the FASB delayed the accounting provisions
of EITF
No. 03-01; however the disclosure requirements remain effective. We
do not
expect the adoption of this EITF to have a material impact on our business,
results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.
Inventory
Costs
In
November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, “Inventory Costs - an amendment of
ARB No. 43”, which is the result of its efforts to converge U.S. accounting
standards for inventories with International Accounting Standards.
SFAS No. 151
requires idle facility expenses, freight, handling costs, and wasted
material
(spoilage) costs to be recognized as current-period charges. It also
requires
that allocation of fixed production overheads to the costs of conversion
be
based on the normal capacity of the production facilities. SFAS No.
151 will be
effective for our fiscal 2006 financial statements. We do not anticipate
that
the implementation of this standard will have a significant impact
on our
business, results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.
Share-Based
Payment
In
December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS 123R, “Share-Based Payment.” SFAS
123R is a revision of SFAS 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.” SFAS
123R establishes standards for the accounting for transactions in which
an
entity exchanges its equity instruments for goods or services. Primarily,
SFAS
123R focuses on accounting for transactions in which an entity obtains
employee
services in share-based payment transactions. It also addresses transactions
in
which an entity incurs liabilities in exchange for goods or services
that are
based on the fair value of the entity’s equity instruments or that may be
settled by the issuance of those equity instruments.
SFAS
123R
requires us to measure the cost of employee services received in exchange
for an
award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair value of the
award
(with limited exceptions). That cost will be recognized over the period
during
which an employee is required to provide service in exchange for the
award - the
requisite service period (usually the vesting period). No compensation
cost is
recognized for equity instruments for which employees do not render
the
requisite service. Therefore, if an employee does not ultimately render
the
requisite service, the costs recognized related to unvested options
will be
reversed.
In
accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Staff Accounting
Bulletin 107, SFAS 123R is effective as of the beginning of the annual
reporting
period that begins after June 15, 2005. Under these guidelines, we will
adopt SFAS 123R as of the beginning of the first quarter of fiscal
year 2006
starting July 1, 2005. We expect this statement to have a significantly
adverse
impact on our future results of operations.
49
Accounting
Changes and Error Corrections
In
May
2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, “Accounting Changes and Error Corrections -
a Replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3” in order to
converge U.S. Accounting Standards with International Accounting Standards.
SFAS
No. 154 changes the requirements for the accounting for and reporting
of a
change in accounting principle. Previously, most voluntary changes
in accounting
principles required recognition of a cumulative effect adjustment within
net
income of the period of the change. SFAS No. 154 requires retrospective
application to prior periods’ financial statements, unless it is impracticable
to determine either the period-specific effects or the cumulative effect
of the
change. SFAS No. 154 is effective for accounting changes made in fiscal
years
beginning after December 15, 2005; however, it does not change the
transition
provisions of any existing accounting pronouncements. We do not believe
the
adoption of SFAS No. 154 will have a material effect on our business,
results of
operations, financial position, or liquidity.
Accounting
for Asset Retirement Obligations in the European Union
In
June
2005, the FASB issued a FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) interpreting SFAS No. 143,
“Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations,” specifically FSP
143-1,
“Accounting for Electronic Equipment Waste Obligations” (“FSP 143-1”).
FSP
143-1
addresses the accounting for obligations associated with Directive
2002/96/EC,
Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment, which was adopted by the
European
Union (“EU”). The FSP provides guidance on how to account for the effects of the
Directive but only with respect to historical waste associated with
products
placed on the market on or before August 13, 2005. FSP
143-1
will
become effective beginning with our fiscal 2006 financial statements.
We do not
believe the adoption of FSP 143-1 will have a material effect on our
business,
results of operations, financial position,
or
liquidity.
ITEM
7A. QUALITATIVE
AND QUANTITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Market
risk represents the risk of changes in the value of a financial instrument,
derivative or non-derivative, caused by fluctuations in interest rates,
foreign
exchange rates, and equity prices. Changes in these factors could cause
fluctuations in the results of our operations and cash flows. In the
ordinary
course of business, we are exposed to foreign currency and interest
rate risks.
These risks primarily relate to the sale of products and services to
foreign
customers and changes in interest rates on any notes payable or capital
leases.
We
currently have limited market risk-sensitive instruments related to
interest
rates. We did not have any notes payable and capital lease obligations
as of
June 30, 2005. Accordingly, we do not have significant exposure to
changing
interest rates. We have not undertaken any additional actions to cover
market
interest rate market risk and are not a party to any other interest
rate market
risk management activities. We do not purchase or hold any derivative
financial
instruments. A hypothetical 10 percent change in market interest rates
over the
next year would not have a material effect on our business, results
of
operations, financial position, or liquidity.
Although
our subsidiaries enter into transactions in currencies other than their
functional currency, foreign currency exposures arising from these
transactions
are not material. The greatest foreign currency exposure arises from
the
remeasurement of our net equity investment in our subsidiaries to U.S.
dollars.
The primary currency to which we had exposure was the Canadian Dollar;
however,
we sold our Canadian subsidiary on March 4, 2005 to a private investment
group.
Accordingly, the fair value of our net foreign investments would not
be
materially affected by a 10 percent adverse change in foreign currency
exchange
rates from the June 30, 2005 levels.
Market
Risk for Investment Securities
Our
investment securities consist primarily of shares in 28-day and 35-day
local
municipal agency obligations that have a par value of $1.00. These
certificates
have a rating of A or higher. Our investment securities also consist
of shares
in triple-A rated short-term money market funds that typically invest
in U.S.
Treasury, U.S. government agency, and highly rated corporate securities.
Since
these funds are managed in a manner designed to maintain a $1.00 per
share
market value, we do not expect any material changes in market values
as a result
of increase or decrease in interest rates. A hypothetical one percent
change in
market interest rates over the next year on our marketable securities
of $15.8
million at June 30, 2005 would not have a material effect on our business,
results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.
50
ITEM
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTAL DATA
The
response to this item is submitted as a separate section of this Form
10-K
beginning on page F-1.
ITEM
9. CHANGE IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURE
As
previously reported in the current report on Form 8-K filed November
2, 2005, as
amended on December 22, 2005, on October 28, 2005, KPMG LLP (“KPMG”) was
dismissed as the principal accountants for ClearOne Communications,
Inc. (the
“Company”) effective upon the completion of the audit of the Company’s
consolidated financial statements as of and for the fiscal year ended
June 30,
2004 and the issuance of its report thereon, and the Company engaged
Hansen,
Barnett & Maxwell, A Professional Corporation (“HBM”), as its new principal
accountants to audit its financial statements for the fiscal year ended
June 30,
2005. The Audit Committee of the Board of Directors recommended and
approved the
decision to change the Company’s principal accountants. KPMG completed its audit
of such financial statements and released its report with respect thereto
on
December 16, 2005.
KPMG’s
reports on the Company’s consolidated financial statements as of and for the
fiscal years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, did not contain an adverse
opinion or
disclaimer of opinion and were not qualified or modified as to uncertainty,
audit scope, or accounting principles, except as follows:
KPMG’s
report on the consolidated financial statements of the Company as of
and for the
years ended June 30, 2003 and 2002 contained a separate paragraph stating
“as
discussed in Note 3 to the accompanying consolidated financial statements,
the
consolidated balance sheets as of June 30, 2002 and 2001, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for
each of the years then ended, have been restated.”
KPMG’s
report on the consolidated financial statements of the Company as of
and for the
years ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, and its report on the consolidated
financial
statements of the Company as of and for years ended June 30, 2004 and
2003 each
contained a separate paragraph stating “as discussed in Note 2 to the
consolidated financial statements, the Company changed, effective July
1, 2002,
its method of accounting for goodwill and other intangible assets as
required by
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142, Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets, Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 144,
Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, and
Statement of
Financial Accounting Standard No. 141, Business Combinations.”
In
connection with the audits of the fiscal years ended June 30, 2004
and 2003, and
during the subsequent interim period through December 16, 2005, there
were (1)
no disagreements with KPMG on any matter of accounting principles or
practices,
financial statement disclosure, or auditing scope or procedures, which
disagreements, if not resolved to the satisfaction of KPMG, would have
caused
KPMG to make reference to the subject matter of the disagreements in
connection
with its reports, and (2) no events of the type listed in paragraphs
(A) through
(D) of Item 304(a)(1)(v) of Regulation S-K, except as follows:
KPMG
reported in a letter to the Company's Audit Committee dated August
16, 2005 that
during its audit of the Company's consolidated financial statements
as of and
for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2003 and 2002, it noted material
weaknesses
in internal controls related to: accounting for revenue recognition
and related
sales returns, credit memos, and allowances; accounting for cutoff
and
period-end close adjustments related to accrued liabilities and prepaid
assets;
the tracking and valuation of inventory; accounting for leases; accounting
for
non-routine transactions; and the lack of personnel with adequate experience
in
preparing financial statements and related footnotes in accordance
with U.S.
generally accepted accounting principles.
KPMG
reported in a letter to the Company's Audit Committee dated December
15, 2005
that during its audit of the Company's consolidated financial statements
as of
and for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, it noted material
weaknesses in internal controls related to: accounting for revenue
recognition
and related sales returns, credit memos, and allowances; accounting
for cutoff
and period-end close adjustments related to accrued liabilities and
prepaid
assets; the tracking and valuation of inventory; accounting for non-routine
transactions; the timeliness and adequacy of the monthly close process;
and the
lack of personnel with adequate experience in preparing financial statements
and
related footnotes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.
51
The
Audit
Committee and the Company's management discussed such material weaknesses
in
internal controls with KPMG, and the Company has authorized KPMG to
respond
fully to the inquiries of the Company’s new principal independent registered
accountant with respect thereto.
During
the Company’s two most recent fiscal years and through October 28, 2005, the
Company did not consult HBM with respect to (i) the application of
accounting
principles to a specified transaction, either completed or proposed;
or the type
of audit opinion that might be rendered on the Company's consolidated
financial
statements; or (ii) any matter that was either the subject of a disagreement
(as
defined in Item 304(a)(1)(iv) of Regulation S-K and the related instructions
to
that Item) or a reportable event (as described in Item 304(a)(1)(v)
of
Regulation S-K).
ITEM
9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
We
maintain disclosure controls and procedures designed to ensure that
information
required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the Securities
Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), is recorded, processed, summarized,
and reported within the required time periods and that such information
is
accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief
Executive
Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow
for timely
decisions regarding required disclosure. The effectiveness of any system
of
disclosure controls and procedures is subject to certain limitations,
including
the exercise of judgment in designing, implementing, and evaluating
the controls
and procedures, the assumptions used in identifying the likelihood
of future
events, and the inability to eliminate improper conduct completely.
A controls
system, no matter how well designed and operated, cannot provide absolute
assurance that the objectives of the controls system are met, and no
evaluation
of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues
and instances
of fraud, if any, within a company have been detected. As a result,
there can be
no assurance that our disclosure controls and procedures will detect
all errors
or fraud.
As
required by Rule 13a-15 under the Exchange Act, we have completed an
evaluation,
under the supervision and with the participation of our management,
including
the Chief Executive Officer and the Interim Chief Financial Officer,
of the
effectiveness and the design and operation of our disclosure controls
and
procedures as of June 30, 2005. Based upon this evaluation and as a
result of
the material weakness discussed below, our management, including the
Chief
Executive Officer and the Interim Chief Financial Officer, has concluded
that
our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of June
30, 2005.
Management nevertheless has concluded that the consolidated financial
statements
included in this Form 10-K present fairly, in all material respects,
our results
of operations and financial position for the periods presented in conformity
with generally accepted accounting principles.
A
material weakness is a control deficiency, or combination of control
deficiencies, that result in more than a remote likelihood that a material
misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not
be prevented
or detected in a timely basis by management or employees in the normal
course of
performing their assigned functions. As of June 30, 2005, we identified
the
following material weakness in our internal controls:
· |
Ineffective
financial statement close process.
We have a material weakness in the timeliness and adequacy
of the monthly
close process to effect a timely and accurate financial statement
close
with the necessary level of review and supervision. Accounting
personnel
have not been able to focus full attention to correcting
this weakness due
to their focus on the preparation, audit, and issuance for
the restated
fiscal 2001, restated fiscal 2002, and fiscal 2003, 2004,
and 2005
consolidated financial statements.
|
There
were no changes to any reported financial results that have been released
by us
in this or any other filings as a result of the above-described material
weakness; however, the following actions have been commenced since
June 30, 2005
in response to the inadequacies noted above:
· |
Initiation
of an evaluation and remediation process with respect to
internal controls
over financial reporting and related processes designed to
identify
internal controls that mitigate financial reporting risk
and identify
control gaps that may require further
remediation.
|
· |
Evaluation
of the staffing, organizational structure, systems, policies
and
procedures, and other reporting processes, to improve the
timeliness of
closing these accounts and to enhance the level of review
and
supervision.
|
· |
Re-evaluation
of prior policies and procedures and the establishment of
new policies and
procedures for such matters as non-routine and complex transactions,
account reconciliation procedures, and contract management
procedures.
|
· |
Hiring
of additional accounting personnel with experience in accounting
matters
and financial reporting.
|
· |
On-going
training and monitoring by management to ensure operation
of controls as
designed.
|
We
have
committed considerable resources to date to the reviews and remedies
described
above, although certain of such items are on-going as of this filing
date, and
it will take time to realize all of the benefits. Additional efforts
will be
required to remediate the material weakness in our controls. We believe
that the
steps taken to date, along with certain other remediation plans we
are currently
undertaking, including those described above, will address the material
weakness
that affected our internal controls over financial reporting for the
year ended
June 30, 2005. We will continue our on-going evaluation and expect
to improve
our internal controls as necessary to assure their effectiveness.
ITEM
9B. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
52
PART
III
ITEM
10. DIRECTORS
AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT
Directors
and Executive Officers
Directors
The
following individuals are directors of ClearOne as of the date of
this
report:
Name
|
Principal
Occupation during Past Five Years
|
Age
|
Director
Since
|
Edward
Dallin Bagley
|
Edward
Dallin Bagley joined our Board of Directors in April 1994
and was named
Chairman of the Board in February 2004. Mr. Bagley also
served as a
Director from April 1987 to July 1991. He also currently
serves as a
Director of Tunex International. Mr. Bagley has been licensed
to practice
law in Utah since 1965 and holds a Juris Doctorate Degree
from the
University of Utah College of Law. For in excess of the
past five years,
Mr. Bagley has managed his own investments and served as
a consultant from
time to time.
|
67
|
1994
|
Brad
R. Baldwin
|
Brad
R. Baldwin joined our Board of Directors in October 1988.
Mr. Baldwin is
an attorney licensed to practice in Utah. Since April 2001,
he has been
engaged in the commercial real estate business with Commerce
CRG in Salt
Lake City, Utah. From February 2000 to March 2001, Mr.
Baldwin was an
executive with Idea Exchange Inc. From October 1994 to
January 2000, he
served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Bank
One, Utah, a
commercial bank headquartered in Salt Lake City, Utah.
Mr. Baldwin holds a
Degree in Finance from the University of Utah and a Juris
Doctorate Degree
from the University of Washington.
|
50
|
1988
|
Larry
R. Hendricks
|
Larry
R. Hendricks joined our Board of Directors in June 2003.
Mr. Hendricks is
a Certified Public Accountant who retired in December 2002
after serving
as Vice-President of Finance and General Manager of Daily
Foods, Inc., a
national meat processing company. During his 30-year career
in accounting,
he was also a self-employed CPA and worked for the international
accounting firm Peat Marwick & Mitchell. Mr. Hendricks has served on
the boards of eight other organizations, including Tunex
International,
Habitat for Humanity, Daily Foods, and Skin Care International.
He earned
a Bachelor's Degree in Accounting from Utah State University
and a Master
of Business Administration Degree from the University of
Utah. Mr.
Hendricks is currently a member of the American Institute
of Certified
Public Accountants and the Utah Association of Certified
Public
Accountants.
|
63
|
2003
|
Scott
M. Huntsman
|
Scott
M. Huntsman joined our Board of Directors in June 2003.
Mr. Huntsman has
served as President and Chief Executive Officer of GlobalSim,
a private
technology and simulation company, since February 2003
and Chief Financial
Officer from April 2002 to February 2003. Prior to GlobalSim,
he spent 11
years on Wall Street as an investment banker, where he
focused on mergers,
acquisitions, and corporate finance transactions. From
August 1996 to
2000, Mr. Huntsman served at Donaldson, Lufkin and Jenrette
Securities
Corporation until their merger with Credit Suisse First
Boston where he
served until January 2002. Mr. Huntsman earned a Bachelor's
Degree from
Columbia University and a Master of Business Administration
Degree from
The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He
also studied at
the London School of Economics as a Kohn Fellowship
recipient.
|
40
|
2003
|
53
Harry
Spielberg
|
Harry
Spielberg joined our Board of Directors in January 2001.
Since January
1996, Mr. Spielberg has been the Director of Cosentini
Information
Technologies’ Audiovisual Group, a division of the consulting engineering
firm Cosentini Associates. Prior to 1996, Mr. Spielberg
served as
Vice-President, Engineering for Media Facilities Corp.
and Barsky &
Associates. Mr. Spielberg received a Bachelor’s Degree in Psychology from
the State University of New York.
|
54
|
2001
|
David
Weiner was a member of our Board of Directors until January 2005
when he
resigned his position.
Director
Committees
Our
Board
of Directors currently has two standing committees; namely, the audit
and
compensation committees.
The
Audit Committee.
The
audit
committee assists the board in its general oversight of our financial
reporting,
internal controls, and audit functions and is directly responsible
for the
appointment, retention, compensation, and oversight of our independent
auditor.
The audit committee is currently composed of Brad R. Baldwin, Larry
R.
Hendricks, and Scott M. Huntsman (Chair). The board has determined
that Mr.
Hendricks is a financial expert and is independent within the meaning
of NASDAQ
Rule 4200(a)(15).
The
Compensation Committee.
The
compensation committee makes recommendations to the Board of Directors
regarding
remuneration of our executive officers and directors and administers
the
incentive plans for our directors, officers, and employees. The compensation
committee is currently composed of Edward Dallin Bagley (Chair),
Brad R.
Baldwin, and Scott M. Huntsman.
Meetings
of the Board of Directors and Committees
The
Board
of Directors held eight meetings during fiscal 2005. The audit committee
held 22
meetings during fiscal 2005. The compensation committee held three
meetings
during fiscal 2005. In 2005, each director attended at least 75 percent
of the
meetings of the Board of Directors and the committees on which they
served.
Nomination
of Director Candidates: Security
holders may recommend candidates for nomination as directors. Any
such
recommendations should include the nominee’s name, home and business addresses
and other contact information, detailed biographical data, and qualifications
for board membership, along with information regarding any relationships
between
the candidate and ClearOne within the last three fiscal years. Any
such
recommendations should be sent to:
ClearOne
Communications, Inc.
1825
Research Way
Salt
Lake
City, Utah 84119
Attention:
Corporate Secretary
Executive
Officers
Our
executive officers as of the date of this filing are as follows:
Name
|
Age
|
Position
|
||
Zeynep
“Zee” Hakimoglu
|
52
|
President
and Chief Executive Officer
|
||
Craig
E. Peeples
|
38
|
Interim
Chief Financial Officer and Corporate Controller
|
||
Tracy
A. Bathurst
|
41
|
Vice-President
of Product Line Management
|
||
Werner
H. Pekarek
|
57
|
Vice-President
of Operations
|
||
Joseph
P. Sorrentino
|
50
|
Vice-President
of Worldwide Sales and
Marketing
|
54
Zee
Hakimoglu
|
Zee
Hakimoglu joined us in December 2003 with more than 15
years of executive
and senior-level, high-tech management experience and was
appointed as
President and Chief Executive Officer in July 2004. She
served in a
variety of executive business development, product marketing,
and
engineering roles including Vice-President of Product Line
Management for
ClearOne from December 2003 to July 2004; Vice-President
of Product Line
Management for Oplink Communications, a publicly traded
developer of fiber
optic subsystems and components from December 2001 to December
2002;
President of OZ Optics USA, a manufacturer of fiber optic
test equipment
and components from August 2000 to November 2001; and various
management
positions including Vice-President of Wireless Engineering
and wireless
business unit Vice-President for Aydin Corp., a telecommunications
equipment company, formerly traded on the New York Stock
Exchange from May
1982 until it was acquired in September 1996. Her business
unit at Aydin
was the largest provider of digital microwave radios to
the US Army, which
used the radios in Desert Storm and a variety of NATO operations.
She also
was Vice-President of Business Development for Kaifa Technology
from
October 1998 to August 2000 and was instrumental in its
acquisition by
E-Tek Dynamics, then again acquired by JDS Uniphase. Through
these
acquisitions, she held the role of Deputy General Manager
of the Kaifa
business unit. Ms. Hakimoglu earned a Bachelor of Science
Degree in
Physics from California State College, Sonoma, and a Master’s Degree in
Physics from Drexel University.
|
Craig
E. Peeples
|
Craig
Peeples joined us in August 2005 as our Corporate
Controller with more than 15 years of diverse
financial experience and was appointed as Interim Chief Financial
Officer in September 2005. From May 2001 to August 2005, Mr.
Peeples held various positions at Mrs. Fields Famous Brands, a
public reporting franchisor/retailer of premium snack foods,
including Director of Compliance & Audits and TCBY
Controller. Mr. Peeples was the Vice-President and
Corporate Controller for TenFold Corporation, a public, software
company, from March 2000 to March 2001. From September 1993 to March
2000, Mr. Peeples worked in the assurance and business
advisory practice
of Arthur Andersen LLP, at the time a "Big-6" public accounting
firm, most recently with the title Experienced Manager. Mr.
Peeples is a graduate of the Marriott School of Management
at Brigham
Young University where he earned his Master of Accountancy
and cum Laude
Bachelor of Science degrees concurrently. Mr. Peeples is a
Utah-state licensed certified public accountant and a member
of the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.
|
Tracy
A. Bathurst
|
Tracy
Bathurst
joined
us in September 1988 and held several positions with us
until he was named
Vice-President of Product Line Management in January 2005.
He was most
recently ClearOne’s Director of Research and Development and has nearly 20
years experience in defining and developing communications-related
products and technology. Mr. Bathurst has lead the design
and development
of ClearOne’s high performance audio and telecommunications equipment.
He
earned a Bachelor of Science degree in Industrial Technology
from Southern
Utah University.
|
Werner
H. Pekarek
|
Werner
Pekarek joined us in January 2005 with more than 15 years
of executive
level operations experience, including responsibility for
process
development, production planning and implementation, purchasing,
supply
chain management and customer service. Mr. Pekarek was
Vice-President of
Operations for start-up high tech companies Break Points
from July 2002 to
December 2004 and Optical Micro Machines from November
2000 to June 2002.
Mr. Pekarek also held executive operations roles with Siemens
Communications including Vice-President of Operations for
Siemens
Communications Devices, Consumer Products from 1997 to
2000,
Vice-President of Operations for Siemens Information & Communications
Networks, Networking Gear from 1992 to 1997, Vice-President
of Operations
for Siemens Wireless, Consumer Products from 1989 to 1992,
and various
other management positions for Siemens from 1980 to 1989.
His expertise
includes low-volume, high-mix networking gear and high-volume
consumer
wireless and cordless phone products. Mr. Pekarek earned
a Bachelor of
Science Degree in Electrical Engineering from the University
of Paderborn
in Germany.
|
55
Joseph
P. Sorrentino
|
Joseph
Sorrentino joined us in November 2004 with more than 25
years experience
in various executive management and sales-related positions.
From April
2002 to November 2004, Mr. Sorrentino was Vice-President
of Sales for
Polycom’s voice communications division, where he was responsible
for
building Polycom’s voice sales team launching new products in the IP space
and installed space, as well as growing their tabletop
conferencing
business. Prior to Polycom, he served as Vice-President
of Worldwide Sales
for 3Ware, a start-up storage company that was subsequently
acquired by
AMCC, a publicly-traded company, from July 1999 to August
2001, and for
IBM’s storage systems division from October 1997 to February
1999, where
he managed the company’s largest storage customers. From October 1995 to
October 1997, Mr. Sorrentino was Vice-President of Worldwide
Distribution
Sales and Marketing for storage startup JPS Corporation
where sales grew
from zero to $120 million in the first year. He has also
worked for
Motorola Communications, Seagate, and Adaptec. Mr. Sorrentino
earned a
Bachelor of Science Degree from San Jose State University.
|
Compliance
with Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act (Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance)
Section
16(a) of the Exchange Act, as amended, requires our directors and
executive
officers, and persons who own more than 10 percent of a registered
class of our
equity securities to file with the SEC initial reports of ownership
on Form 3
and reports of changes of ownership of our equity securities on Forms
4 and 5.
Officers, directors, and greater than 10 percent shareholders are
required to
furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a) reports they file.
Based
solely on a review of the reports and amendments to reports furnished
to us, we
believe that all reports required by Section 16(a) were filed on
a timely basis,
except that the Form 4 dated March 16, 2006 for DeLonie Call was
filed late.
Code
of Ethics
On
November 18, 2004, the Board of Directors adopted a code of ethics
that applies
to our Board of Directors, executive officers, and employees, a copy
of which
was included as an exhibit to our Form 10-K for the period ended
June 30, 2003.
ITEM
11. EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION
Summary
Compensation
The
following table sets forth for the periods indicated the compensation
paid to or
accrued for the benefit of each person who served as our Chief Executive
Officer
during fiscal 2005 and our next five most highly compensated executive
officers
who were serving as executive officers on June 30, 2005 (collectively
referred
to herein as the “named executive officers”). The position identified in the
table for each person is the position they held with us as of June
30, 2005.
56
SUMMARY
COMPENSATION TABLE
Annual
Compensation
|
Long-Term
Compensation
|
|||||||||||
Awards
|
Payouts
|
|||||||||||
Securities
|
||||||||||||
Other
|
Under-
|
All
|
||||||||||
Annual
|
lying
|
Other
|
||||||||||
Fiscal
|
Paid
|
Compen-
|
Options
|
Compen-
|
||||||||
Name
and Position
|
Year
|
Salary
|
Bonus
|
sation1
|
/SARS
|
sation2
|
||||||
Chief
Executive Officer
|
||||||||||||
Zeynep
Hakimoglu3
|
2005
|
$193,077
|
$64,529
|
-
|
100,000
|
$17,330
|
||||||
President
and
|
||||||||||||
Chief
Executive Officer
|
2004
|
$75,293
|
$2,359
|
-
|
50,000
|
$388
|
||||||
Executive
Officers as of June 30, 2005
|
||||||||||||
Tracy
A. Bathurst4
|
2005
|
$113,065
|
$30,676
|
-
|
20,000
|
$898
|
||||||
Vice-President
|
||||||||||||
2004
|
$104,584
|
-
|
5,000
|
$637
|
||||||||
2003
|
$101,220
|
-
|
-
|
$1,000
|
||||||||
DeLonie
N. Call5
|
2005
|
$128,846
|
$51,478
|
-
|
-
|
$1,059
|
||||||
Vice-President
and
|
||||||||||||
Corporate
Secretary
|
2004
|
$100,000
|
$20,500
|
-
|
105,000
|
$600
|
||||||
2003
|
$97,660
|
-
|
-
|
15,000
|
$946
|
|||||||
Donald
E. Frederick6
|
2005
|
$176,904
|
$79,560
|
-
|
75,000
|
$1,524
|
||||||
Chief
Financial Officer
|
||||||||||||
Werner
H. Pekarek7
|
2005
|
$70,031
|
$34,408
|
-
|
45,000
|
$17,573
|
||||||
Vice-President
|
||||||||||||
Joseph
P. Sorrentino8
|
2005
|
$104,327
|
$99,729
|
-
|
55,000
|
$13,363
|
||||||
Vice-President
|
____________
1
|
The
Company did not pay or provide perquisites or other benefits
during the
periods indicated by any named executive officer in an
aggregate amount
exceeding $50,000.
|
2
|
These
amounts reflect our contributions to our deferred compensation
plan,
401(k) plan, or severance compensation on behalf of the
named executive
officers.
|
3
|
Ms.
Hakimoglu served as our Vice-President of Product Line
Management from
December 2003 to July 8, 2004 when she was named as our
President and
Chief Executive Officer.
|
4
|
Mr.
Bathurst was named Vice-President of Product Line Management
in January
2005. Mr. Bathurst’s annual salary is
$120,000.
|
5
|
Ms.
Call was employed as an executive officer until February
7, 2006 when her
position as Vice-President - Human Resources was eliminated.
Ms. Call
received a total severance payment of $93,300. In connection
with this
payment, she surrendered and delivered to the Company 145,000
stock
options (86,853 of which were
vested).
|
6
|
Mr.
Frederick was employed by the Company from July 12, 2004
to September 15,
2005.
|
7
|
Mr.
Pekarek was employed by the Company on January 4, 2005.
Mr. Pekarek’s
annual base salary is $160,000.
|
8
|
Mr.
Sorrentino was employed by the Company on November 15,
2004. Mr.
Sorrentino’s annual base salary is
$175,000.
|
57
Options/SAR
Grants in Last Fiscal Year
The
following table sets forth the stock option grants made to the named
executive
officers for fiscal 2005. We did not grant any stock appreciation
rights, or
SARs, to the named executive officers during fiscal 2005.
The
exercise price per share of each option granted was equal to the
closing price
of our common stock on the date of grant.
OPTION
GRANTS IN FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2005
(INDIVIDUAL
GRANTS)
Number
of
Securities
Underlying
Options
|
Percent
of
Total
Options
Granted
to
Employees in
|
Exercise
or
Base
|
Expiration
|
Potential
Realizable
Value
of Assumed
Annual
Rate of
Stock
Price
Appreciation
for
Option
Term4
|
||||||||
Name
and Position
|
Granted
(#)
|
Fiscal
Year1
|
Price
($/Sh)
|
Date
|
5%($)
|
10%($)
|
||||||
Chief
Executive Officer
|
||||||||||||
Zeynep
Hakimoglu
|
100,0002
|
22.2%
|
$5.55
|
7/26/2014
|
$394,238
|
$1,028,480
|
||||||
Executive
Officers as of June 30, 2005
|
||||||||||||
Tracy
A. Bathurst
|
20,0003
|
4.4%
|
$4.00
|
1/27/2015
|
$56,827
|
$148,249
|
||||||
Donald
E. Frederick
|
75,0002
|
16.6%
|
$5.55
|
7/26/2014
|
$295,679
|
$771,360
|
||||||
Werner
H. Pekarek
|
45,0003
|
10.0%
|
$4.00
|
1/27/2015
|
$127,861
|
$333,561
|
||||||
Joseph
P. Sorrentino
|
55,0003
|
12.2%
|
$4.21
|
11/18/2014
|
$164,479
|
$429,089
|
____________
1. |
Based
on aggregate of 450,500 shares subject to options granted
to our employees
in 2005, including the named executive
officers.
|
2. |
The
options have a ten-year term and vest over a three-year
period with
one-third vesting on the first anniversary of the grant
date and the
remaining two-thirds vesting in equal monthly installments
over the
remaining 24-month period. The options vest immediately
upon a change of
control as defined in the plan or our Board of Directors
has authority to
accelerate vesting in the event of certain specified
corporate
transactions.
|
3. |
The
options have a ten-year term and vest over a four-year
period with
one-fourth vesting on the first anniversary of the grant
date and the
remaining three-fourths vesting in equal monthly installments
over the
remaining 36-month period. The options vest immediately
upon a change of
control as defined in the plan or our Board of Directors
has authority to
accelerate vesting in the event of certain specified
corporate
transactions.
|
4. |
Potential
realizable values are computed by (1) multiplying the
number of shares of
common stock subject to a given option by the per-share
assumed stock
value compounded at the annual 5 percent or 10 percent
appreciation rate
shown in the table for the entire ten-year term of the
option and (2)
subtracting from that result the aggregate option exercise
price. The 5
percent and 10 percent assumed annual rates of stock
price appreciation
are mandated by the rules of the SEC and do not represent
our estimate or
projection of the future prices of our common stock.
Actual gains, if any,
on stock option exercises are dependent on our future
financial
performance, overall market conditions, and the named
executive officer’s
continued employment through the vesting periods. The
actual value
realized may be greater or less than the potential realizable
value set
forth in the table.
|
Aggregated
Option/SAR Exercises
and Fiscal Year-End Option/SAR Value Table
The
following table sets forth information concerning stock options exercised
by the
named executive officers during fiscal 2005 and the year-end value
of
in-the-money, unexercised options:
58
AGGREGATED
OPTION EXERCISES IN FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2005
AND
FISCAL YEAR-END OPTION VALUES
Number
of
|
||||||||
Securities
|
Value
of
|
|||||||
Underlying
|
Unexercised
|
|||||||
Unexercised
|
In-the-Money
|
|||||||
Options
|
Options
|
|||||||
Shares
|
at
FY-End (#)
|
at
FY-End ($)
|
||||||
Acquired
|
Value
|
Exercisable/
|
Exercisable/
|
|||||
Name
and Position
|
on
Exercise (#)
|
Realized
($)1
|
Unexercisable
|
Unexercisable2
|
||||
Chief
Executive Officer
|
||||||||
Zeynep
Hakimoglu
|
-
|
$-
|
20,833/129,167
|
$-/$-
|
||||
Executive
Officers as of June 30, 2005
|
||||||||
Tracy
A. Bathurst
|
-
|
$-
|
40,207/59,793
|
$44,250/$-
|
||||
DeLonie
N. Call3
|
-
|
$-
|
64,249/80,751
|
$31,425/$27,525
|
||||
Donald
E. Frederick
|
-
|
$-
|
-/75,000
|
$-/$-
|
||||
Werner
H. Pekarek
|
-
|
$-
|
-/45,000
|
$-/$-
|
||||
Joseph
P. Sorrentino
|
-
|
$-
|
-/55,000
|
$-/$-
|
1
|
Based
upon the market price of the purchased shares on the exercise
date less
the option exercise price paid for such
shares.
|
2
|
Based
on the market price of $3.70 per share, which was the closing
selling
price of our common stock on the Pink Sheets on the last
business day of
our 2005 fiscal year, less the option exercise price payable
per
share.
|
3
|
Ms.
Call was employed as an executive officer until February
7, 2006 when her
position as Vice-President - Human Resources was eliminated.
Ms. Call
received a total severance payment of $93,300. In connection
with this
payment, she surrendered and delivered to the Company 145,000
stock
options (86,853 of which were
vested).
|
Director
Compensation
All
of
our directors serve until their successors are elected and have qualified
to
serve as directors. We pay the Chairman of the Board $4,000 per month
and all
other directors $2,000 per month for their services to us as directors.
Dal
Bagley, a director, served as a consultant to the Company from November
2002
through January 2004 and was paid $5,000 per month for his services.
He
consulted with the Company’s management on mergers and financial matters on an
as needed basis. Mr. Bagley’s services were performed pursuant to an oral
agreement, the terms of which were approved by the Board of
Directors.
Employment
Contracts and Termination of Employment and Change-in-Control
Arrangements
Employment
Agreement. On
October 24, 2002, we entered into a three-year employment agreement
with Frances
Flood, which was terminated on December 5, 2003 pursuant to the employment
separation agreement discussed below.
As
of the
end of fiscal 2005, no other named executive officer was party to
an employment
or severance agreement with us and each named executive officer’s employment was
on an “at-will” basis.
59
Employment
Separation Agreements. On
December 5, 2003, we entered into employment separation agreements
with each of
Frances Flood, the Company’s former Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and
President, and Susie Strohm, the Company’s former Chief Financial Officer, which
generally provided that such persons would resign from their positions
and
employment with the Company and that the Company would make one-time,
lump-sum
payments to such persons in consideration of their surrender and
delivery to the
Company of shares of the Company’s common stock and Company stock options and
their release of claims against the Company. Ms. Flood and Ms. Strohm
also
agreed to cooperate with the Company in the SEC Action and related
proceedings
and the Company agreed to continue to indemnify such persons for
attorneys fees
incurred in the SEC Action and related proceedings, subject to the
limitations
imposed by Utah law. The Company also released any existing claims
against such
persons except such claims as to which indemnification would not
be permitted by
Utah law. The agreement with Ms. Flood provided for a payment to
her of $350,000
and her surrender and delivery to the Company of 35,000 shares of
the Company’s
common stock and 706,434 stock options (461,433 of which were vested).
The
agreement with Ms. Strohm provided for a payment to her of $75,000
and her
surrender and delivery to the Company of 15,500 shares of the Company’s common
stock and 268,464 stock options (171,963 of which were vested).
Settlement
Agreements and Releases. We
entered into settlement agreements and releases with four former
executive
officers in connection with the cessation of their employment, which
generally
provided for their resignations from their positions and employment
with the
Company, the payment of severance in increments in accordance with
the regular
payroll schedule, and a general release of claims against the Company
by each of
such persons. On February 27, 2004, an agreement was entered into
with Greg
Rand, the Company’s former President and Chief Operating Officer, which
generally provided for a severance payment of $75,000 and an accelerated
vesting
of 25,000 stock options. On April 6, 2004, an agreement was entered
into with
George Claffey, the Company’s former Chief Financial Officer, which generally
provided for a severance payment of $61,192. On June 16, 2004, an
agreement was
entered into with Mike Keough, the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer,
which generally provided for a severance payment of $46,154 and vested
options
totaling 18,749 stock options. On July 15, 2004, an agreement was
entered into
with Angelina Beitia, the Company’s former Vice-President, which generally
provided for a lump-sum payment of $100,000 and her surrendered and
delivery to
the Company of 145,000 stock options (10,624 of which were vested).
On February
20, 2006, we entered into a settlement agreement and release with
DeLonie Call,
the Company’s former Vice-President - Human Resources, in connection with the
cessation of her employment, which generally provided for her resignation
from
her positions and employment with the Company, the payment of severance
in the
amount of $93,300, her surrender of 145,000 stock options (86,853
of which were
vested) and a general release of claims against the Company. In accordance
with
the terms of our stock option plans, any unvested stock options terminated
on
the date of termination of such persons’ employment with the Company.
Stock
Option Plans. Under
the
1998 Stock Option Plan, our Board of Directors has the authority
to
automatically accelerate the vesting of each outstanding option granted
to a
named executive officer in the event of specified corporate transactions,
including a change in control whether or not the outstanding option
is assumed
or substituted in connection with the corporate transaction or change
in
control. All options outstanding under the 1990 Stock Option Plan
are fully
vested and there are no additional options available for grant.
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
The
Compensation Committee during fiscal 2005 was composed of Edward
Dallin Bagley,
and Brad R. Baldwin, and Scott M. Huntsman. This same composition
exists today.
Mr. Bagley also served as a consultant to the Company from November
2002 through
January 2004 and was paid $5,000 monthly for his services. No interlocking
relationships exist between any member of the Company’s Board of Directors or
Compensation Committee and any member of the board of directors or
compensation
committee of any other company nor has any such interlocking relationship
existed in the past. No member of the Compensation Committee is or
was formerly
an executive officer or an employee of the Company or its
subsidiaries.
60
ITEM
12. SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED
SHAREHOLDER
MATTERS
The
following table sets forth certain information regarding ownership
of our common
stock as of February 28, 2006 by (i) each person known to us to be
the
beneficial owner of more than 5 percent of our outstanding common
stock, (ii)
each director, (iii) the named executive officers, and (iv) all of
our executive
officers and directors as a group. Each person has sole investment
and voting
power with respect to the shares indicated, subject to community
property laws
where applicable, except as otherwise indicated below. The address
for each
director and officer is in care of ClearOne Communications, Inc.,
1825 Research
Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84119.
Names
of
Beneficial Owners
|
Amount
of
Beneficial
Ownership
|
Percentage
of
Class1
|
||
Beneficial
Owners
|
||||
FMR
Corp.
|
824,487
|
6.5%
|
||
Royce
& Associates Inc.
|
651,644
|
5.1%
|
||
Graham
Partners LP
|
642,650
|
5.0%
|
||
Total
|
2,118,781
|
16.6%
|
Directors
and
Executive
Officers
|
||||
Edward
Dallin Bagley2
|
1,813,351
|
14.2%
|
||
Brad
R. Baldwin3
|
190,416
|
1.5%
|
||
Zee
Hakimoglu4
|
93,055
|
0.7%
|
||
Harry
Spielberg5
|
67,750
|
0.5%
|
||
Tracy
A. Bathurst6
|
35,079
|
0.3%
|
||
Larry
R. Hendricks7
|
34,250
|
0.3%
|
||
Scott
M. Huntsman8
|
34,250
|
0.3%
|
||
Joseph
P. Sorrentino9
|
25,972
|
0.2%
|
||
Werner
Pekarek10
|
18,750
|
0.1%
|
||
Directors
and Executive Officers as a Group
|
||||
(10
people)11
|
2,312,873
|
18.2%
|
1
|
For
each individual included in the table, the calculation
of percentage of
beneficial ownership is based on 12,184,727 shares of
common stock
outstanding as of February 28, 2006 and shares of common
stock that could
be acquired by the individual within 60 days of February
28, 2006, upon
the exercise of options or
otherwise.
|
2
|
Includes
126,166 shares held by Mr. Bagley’s spouse with respect to which he
disclaims beneficial ownership and options to purchase
142,750 shares that
are exercisable within 60 days after February 28,
2006.
|
3
|
Includes
88,666 shares held in the Baldwin Family Trust; 9,000
shares owned
directly, which are held in an IRA under the name of
Mr. Baldwin; and
options to purchase 92,750 shares that are exercisable
within 60 days
after February 28, 2006.
|
4
|
Includes
options to purchase 93,055 shares that are exercisable
within 60 days
after February 28, 2006.
|
5
|
Includes
options to purchase 67,750 shares that are exercisable
within 60 days
after February 28, 2006.
|
6
|
Includes
options to purchase 34,581 shares that are exercisable
within 60 days
after February 28, 2006.
|
7
|
Includes
options to purchase 34,250 shares that are exercisable
within 60 days
after February 28, 2006.
|
8
|
Includes
options to purchase 34,250 shares that are exercisable
within 60 days
after February 28, 2006.
|
9
|
Includes
options to purchase 25,972 shares that are exercisable
within 60 days
after February 28, 2006.
|
10
|
Includes
options to purchase 18,750 shares that are exercisable
within 60 days
after February 28, 2006.
|
11
|
Includes
options to purchase a total of 544,108 shares that are
exercisable within
60 days after February 28, 2006 by executive officers
and directors.
|
61
ITEM
13. CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
Indemnification
of Officers and Directors. The
Company’s by-laws and the Utah Revised Business Corporation Act provide for
indemnification of directors and officers against reasonable expenses
incurred
by such persons in connection with civil or criminal actions or proceedings
to
which they have been made parties because they are or were directors
or officers
of the Company or its subsidiaries. Indemnification is permitted
if the person
satisfies the required standards of conduct. Certain of the litigation
matters
described in “Item 3. Legal Proceedings” involved certain of the Company’s
current and former directors and officers, all of whom are covered
by the
aforementioned indemnity and if applicable, certain prior period
insurance
policies. The Company has indemnified such persons for legal expenses
incurred
by them in such actions and has sought reimbursement from its insurance
carriers. The Company cannot predict with certainty the extent to
which the
Company will recover the indemnification payments from its insurers.
The Company
has made payments to the law firms representing such current and
former
directors and officers in the aggregate amount of approximately $1.7
million
during the period from January 2003 through February 28, 2006.
Joint
Prosecution and Defense Agreement.
In
connection with the Insurance Coverage Action described herein under
the caption
“Item 3. Legal Proceedings,” the Company and its counsel entered into a Joint
Prosecution and Defense Agreement dated as of April 1, 2004 with
Edward Dallin
Bagley, Chairman of the Board of Directors, and his counsel, which
generally
provides that ClearOne and Mr. Bagley will jointly prosecute their
claims
against the carriers of certain prior period directors and officers
liability
insurance policies and jointly defend the claims made by the insurance
carriers
in order to reduce litigation expenses. In the litigation, ClearOne
is generally
pursuing claims to recover the policy limits of certain officer and
director
liability insurance policies and Mr. Bagley is pursuing related claims
to
recover losses he incurred as a result of such carriers’ refusal to pay the
policy limits which refusals caused ClearOne to enter into a settlement
agreement in the class action litigation that diluted Mr. Bagley’s shareholdings
in ClearOne. The agreement, as amended, provides that the two law
firms shall
jointly represent ClearOne and Mr. Bagley, the parties shall cooperate
in
connection with the conduct of the litigation and that ClearOne shall
pay all
litigation expenses, including attorneys’ fees of its counsel and Mr. Bagley’s
counsel, except litigation expenses which are solely related to Mr.
Bagley’s
claims in the litigation. In February 2005, we entered into a confidential
settlement agreement with Lumbermens Mutual pursuant to which ClearOne
and Mr.
Bagley received a lump-sum cash amount and the plaintiffs agreed
to dismiss
their claims against Lumbermens Mutual with prejudice. The cash settlement
will
be held in a segregated account until the claims involving National
Union have
been resolved, at which time the amounts received in the action will
be
allocated among the Company and Mr. Bagley. The Joint Prosecution
and Defense
Agreement does not explain any allocation method and no allocation
discussions
have occurred. On October 21, 2005, the court granted summary judgment
in favor
of National Union on its rescission defense and accordingly entered
a judgment
dismissing all of the claims asserted by ClearOne and Mr. Bagley.
On February 2,
2006, the Company and Mr. Bagley filed an appeal to the summary judgment
granted
on October 21, 2005 and intend to vigorously pursue the appeal and
any follow-up
proceedings regarding their claims against National Union, although
no
assurances can be given that they will be successful.
ITEM
14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
ClearOne
engaged Hansen, Barnett & Maxwell, A Professional Corporation (“HBM”) in
October 2005 to replace KPMG LLP (“KPMG”) as its independent registered public
accountants. ClearOne engaged HBM to audit its financial statements
for its 2005
fiscal year, as well as to perform quarterly reviews on the quarters
within that
fiscal year.
ClearOne
engaged KPMG in December 2003 to replace Ernst & Young, LLP as its
independent registered public accountants. ClearOne engaged KPMG
to audit its
financial statements for its 2004 and 2003 fiscal years and to reaudit
its
consolidated financial statements for its 2002 and 2001 fiscal years,
as well as
to perform quarterly reviews on the quarters within each of these
fiscal years.
Since KPMG was engaged for a multi-year audit engagement, it is not
practicable
to separate fees incurred into the specific audit period covered
by the
multi-period fees.
62
The
fees
for the audits and quarterly reviews related to the June 30, 2005
financial
statements performed by HBM; the fees for the audits and quarterly
reviews
related to the June 30, 2004 financial statements and other services
performed
by KPMG; and the fees for the multi-year audits and quarterly reviews
related to
the June 30, 2003, 2002, and 2001 financial statements, audit-related
fees,
taxes, and other services performed by KPMG were as follows:
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
Multi-Year
|
||||||||
Audit
Fees
|
$
|
237,121
|
$
|
875,188
|
$
|
2,204,109
|
||||
Audit-Related
Fees
|
-
|
-
|
13,029
|
|||||||
Tax
Fees
|
-
|
-
|
126,106
|
|||||||
Other
|
-
|
27,110
|
-
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
237,121
|
$
|
902,298
|
$
|
2,343,244
|
“Audit
Fees” consisted of fees billed for services rendered for the audit or reaudit
of
ClearOne’s annual financial statements, Statement on Audit Standards 100 reviews
of quarterly financial information included herein, and other services
normally
provided in connection with statutory and regulatory filings. “Audit-Related
Fees” consisted of fees billed for consents on audit opinions for acquirees
of
the Company. “Tax Fees” consisted of fees billed for tax payment planning and
tax preparation services. “Other” consisted of fees billed for document
production related to legal proceedings.
Our
Audit
Committee Charter provides for pre-approval of non-audit services
performed by
our independent registered public accountants. All of the services
performed by
KPMG described above under the captions "Audit-Related Fees" and
"Tax Fees" were
approved in advance by our Audit Committee.
63
PART
IV
ITEM
15. EXHIBITS
AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
(a) 1. Financial
Statements
The
following financial statements are filed as part of this report in
a separate
section of this Form 10-K beginning on page F-1.
Report
of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm - Hansen Barnett & Maxwell,
PC
Report
of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm - KPMG LLP
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2005 and 2004
Consolidated
Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss) for fiscal
years ended
June
30,
2005, 2004, and 2003
Consolidated
Statements of Shareholders’ Equity for fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004,
and
2003
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004,
and
2003
Notes
to
Consolidated Financial Statements
2. Financial
Statement Schedules
All
schedules are omitted as the required information is inapplicable
or the
information is presented in the consolidated financial statements
and notes
thereto.
3. Exhibits
The
following documents are included as exhibits to this report.
Exhibit
|
SEC
Ref.
|
|||||
No.
|
No.
|
Title
of Document
|
Location
|
|||
3.1
|
3
|
Articles
of Incorporation and amendments thereto
|
Incorp.
by reference1
|
|||
3.2
|
3
|
Bylaws
|
Incorp.
by reference2
|
|||
10.1
|
10
|
Employment
Separation Agreement between ClearOne Communications, Inc.
and Frances
Flood, dated December 5, 2003.*
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
10.2
|
10
|
Employment
Separation Agreement between ClearOne Communications, Inc.
and Susie
Strohm, dated December 5, 2003.*
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
10.3
|
10
|
Share
Purchase Agreement between ClearOne Communications, Inc.
and ClearOne
Communications of Canada, Inc. and 3814149 Canada, Inc.
3814157 Canada,
Inc., Stechyson Family Trust, Jim Stechyson, Norm Stechyson,
and Heather
Stechyson Family Trust, dated as of August 16, 2002
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
10.4
|
10
|
Asset
Purchase Agreement between ClearOne Communications, Inc.
and Comrex Corp.,
dated as of August 23, 2002
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
10.5
|
10
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger dated January 21, 2003, between ClearOne
Communications, Inc., Tundra Acquisitions Corporation,
and E.mergent,
Inc., and the related Voting Agreement with E.mergent
shareholders
|
Incorp.
by reference7
|
|||
10.6
|
10
|
Joint
Prosecution and Defense Agreement dated April 1, 2004 between
ClearOne
Communications, Inc. Parsons Behle & Latimer, Edward Dallin Bagley and
Burbidge & Mitchell, and amendment thereto
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
10.7
|
10
|
Asset
Purchase Agreement dated May 6, 2004 between ClearOne Communications,
Inc.
and M:SPACE, Inc.
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
10.8
|
10
|
Asset
Purchase Agreement among Clarinet, Inc., American Teleconferencing
Services, Ltd. doing business as Premiere Conferencing,
and ClearOne
Communications, Inc., dated July 1, 2004
|
Incorp.
by reference8
|
|||
10.9
|
10
|
Stock
Purchase Agreement dated March 4, 2005 between 6351352
Canada Inc. and
Gentner Ventures, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of ClearOne
Communications, Inc.
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
10
|
Settlement
Agreement and Release between ClearOne Communications,
Inc. and DeLonie
Call dated February 20, 2006*
|
This
filing
|
||||
10.11
|
10
|
1990
Incentive Plan
|
Incorp.
by reference3
|
|||
10.12
|
10
|
1998
Stock Option Plan
|
Incorp.
by reference4
|
|||
10.13
|
10
|
Employment
Settlement Agreement and Release between ClearOne Communications,
Inc. and
Gregory Rand dated February 27, 2004*
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
10.14
|
10
|
Employment
Settlement Agreement and Release between ClearOne Communications,
Inc. and
George Claffey dated April 6, 2004*
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
10.15
|
10
|
Employment
Settlement Agreement and Release between ClearOne Communications,
Inc. and
Michael Keough dated June 16, 2004*
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
64
10.16
|
10
|
Employment
Settlement Agreement and Release between ClearOne Communications,
Inc. and
Angelina Beitia dated July 15, 2004*
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
10.17
|
10
|
Manufacturing
Agreement between ClearOne Communications, Inc. and Inovar,
Inc. dated
August 1, 2005
|
Incorp.
by reference6
|
|||
10.18
|
10
|
Mutual
Release and Waiver between ClearOne Communications, Inc.
and Burk
Technology, Inc. dated August 22, 2005
|
Incorp.
by reference6
|
|||
14.1
|
14
|
Code
of Ethics, approved by the Board of Directors on November
18,
2004
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
|||
21
|
Subsidiaries
of the registrant
|
This
filing
|
||||
31
|
Section
302 Certification of Chief Executive Officer
|
This
filing
|
||||
31
|
Section
302 Certification of Interim Chief Financial Officer
|
This
filing
|
||||
32
|
Section
1350 Certification of Chief Executive Officer
|
This
filing
|
||||
32
|
Section
1350 Certification of Interim Chief Financial Officer
|
This
filing
|
||||
99.1
|
99
|
Audit
Committee Charter, adopted November 18, 2004
|
Incorp.
by reference5
|
______________
*Constitutes
a management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.
1 Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Annual Reports on Form 10-K for the fiscal
years ended
June
30,
1989 and June 30, 1991.
2 Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended
June
30,
1993.
3 Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal
year ended
June
30,
1996.
4 Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal
year ended
June
30,
1998.
5 Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended
June
30,
2003.
6 Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended
June
30,
2004.
7 Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed February 6,
2003
8 Incorporated
by reference to the Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed July 1,
2004.
65
Pursuant
to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of
1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on
its behalf by
the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
|
||
March
27, 2006
|
By:
|
/s/
Zeynep Hakimoglu
|
Zeynep
Hakimoglu
|
||
President
and Chief Executive Officer
|
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this
report has been
signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant
and in the
capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signature
|
Title
|
Date
|
||
/s/
Zeynep Hakimoglu
|
President
and Chief Executive Officer
|
March
27, 2006
|
||
Zeynep
Hakimoglu
|
(Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|||
/s/
Craig E. Peeples
|
Interim
Chief Financial Officer
|
March
27, 2006
|
||
Craig
E. Peeples
|
(Principal
Financial and Accounting Officer)
|
|||
/s/
Edward Dallin Bagley
|
Chairman
of the
|
March
27, 2006
|
||
Edward
Dallin Bagley
|
Board
of Directors
|
|||
/s/
Brad R. Baldwin
|
Director
|
March
27, 2006
|
||
Brad
R. Baldwin
|
||||
/s/
Larry R. Hendricks
|
Director
|
March
27, 2006
|
||
Larry
R. Hendricks
|
||||
/s/
Scott M. Huntsman
|
Director
|
March
27, 2006
|
||
Scott
M. Huntsman
|
||||
/s/
Harry Spielberg
|
Director
|
March
27, 2006
|
||
Harry
Spielberg
|
66
ITEM
8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Index
to Consolidated Financial Statements
Page
|
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm – Hansen Barnett &
Maxwell
|
F-2
|
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm – KPMG
LLP
|
F-3
|
Consolidated
Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2005 and 2004
|
F-4
|
Consolidated
Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss)
for fiscal years
ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003
|
F-5
|
Consolidated
Statements of Shareholders' Equity for fiscal years
ended June 30, 2005,
2004, and 2003
|
F-7
|
Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for fiscal years ended June
30, 2005, 2004, and
2003
|
F-8
|
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
F-10
|
Report
of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm -
Hansen
Barnett & Maxwell
To
the
Board of Directors and the Shareholders
ClearOne
Communications, Inc.
We
have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of ClearOne
Communications,
Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2005, and the related consolidated
statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss), shareholders’ equity,
and cash flows for the year then ended. These consolidated financial
statements
are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to
express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based
on our
audit.
We
conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public
Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require
that we plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
the financial
statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes
examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial
statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles
used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating
the overall
financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides
a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In
our
opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above
present fairly,
in all material respects, the financial position of ClearOne Communications,
Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2005 and the results of their
operations
and their cash flows for the year then ended in conformity with
U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles.
HANSEN
BARNETT & MAXWELL
Salt
Lake
City, Utah
March
23,
2006
F-2
Report
of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm -
KPMG
LLP
The
Board
of Directors and Shareholders
ClearOne
Communications, Inc.:
We
have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of ClearOne
Communications,
Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2004, and the related consolidated
statements of operations and comprehensive loss, shareholders’ equity, and cash
flows for the years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003. These consolidated
financial
statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial
statements based on our 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 ClearOne Communications,
Inc. and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2004 and the results of their
operations
and their cash flows for the years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003
in conformity
with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
KPMG
LLP
Salt
Lake
City, Utah
December
15, 2005
F-3
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
June
30,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
ASSETS
|
|||||||
Current
assets:
|
|||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
1,892
|
$
|
4,207
|
|||
Marketable
securities
|
15,800
|
1,750
|
|||||
Accounts
receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts
of
$46 and $24, respectively
|
6,859
|
6,213
|
|||||
Inventories,
net
|
5,806
|
6,071
|
|||||
Due
from OM Video
|
-
|
200
|
|||||
Income
tax receivable
|
3,952
|
3,367
|
|||||
Deferred
income taxes, net
|
270
|
401
|
|||||
Prepaid
expenses
|
300
|
520
|
|||||
Assets
held for sale
|
-
|
4,473
|
|||||
Total
current assets
|
34,879
|
27,202
|
|||||
Property
and equipment, net
|
2,805
|
4,027
|
|||||
Intangibles,
net
|
322
|
901
|
|||||
Other
assets
|
15
|
26
|
|||||
Total
assets
|
$
|
38,021
|
$
|
32,156
|
|||
LIABILITIES
AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|||||||
Current
liabilities:
|
|||||||
Capital
lease obligations
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
6
|
|||
Note
payable
|
-
|
692
|
|||||
Accounts
payable
|
2,163
|
1,930
|
|||||
Accrued
liabilities
|
5,622
|
10,705
|
|||||
Deferred
product revenue
|
5,055
|
6,107
|
|||||
Liabilities
associated with assets held for sale
|
-
|
3,067
|
|||||
Total
current liabilities
|
12,840
|
22,507
|
|||||
Capital
lease obligations, net of current portion
|
-
|
2
|
|||||
Note
payable, net of current portion
|
-
|
240
|
|||||
Deferred
income taxes, net
|
270
|
401
|
|||||
Total
liabilities
|
13,110
|
23,150
|
|||||
Commitments
and contingencies (see Notes 12 and 15)
|
|||||||
Shareholders'
equity:
|
|||||||
Common
stock, 50,000,000 shares authorized, par value $0.001,
|
|||||||
11,264,233
and 11,036,233 shares issued and outstanding, respectively
|
11
|
11
|
|||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
49,393
|
48,395
|
|||||
Deferred
compensation
|
(33
|
)
|
(54
|
)
|
|||
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
|
-
|
1,189
|
|||||
Accumulated
deficit
|
(24,460
|
)
|
(40,535
|
)
|
|||
Total
shareholders' equity
|
24,911
|
9,006
|
|||||
Total
liabilities and shareholders' equity
|
$
|
38,021
|
$
|
32,156
|
|||
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial
statements
|
F-4
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Revenue:
|
||||||||||
Product
|
$
|
31,645
|
$
|
27,836
|
$
|
27,512
|
||||
Business
services
|
-
|
130
|
1,054
|
|||||||
Total
revenue
|
31,645
|
27,966
|
28,566
|
|||||||
Cost
of goods sold:
|
||||||||||
Product
|
14,701
|
13,683
|
15,940
|
|||||||
Product
inventory write-offs
|
250
|
2,696
|
2,175
|
|||||||
Total
cost of goods sold
|
14,951
|
16,379
|
18,115
|
|||||||
Gross
profit
|
16,694
|
11,587
|
10,451
|
|||||||
Operating
expenses:
|
||||||||||
Marketing
and selling
|
9,070
|
8,497
|
7,070
|
|||||||
General
and administrative
|
5,489
|
6,767
|
5,915
|
|||||||
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
(2,046
|
)
|
4,080
|
7,325
|
||||||
Research
and product development
|
5,305
|
4,237
|
3,281
|
|||||||
Impairment
losses (see Note 10)
|
180
|
-
|
5,102
|
|||||||
Restructuring
charge (see Note 26)
|
110
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
18,108
|
23,581
|
28,693
|
|||||||
Operating
loss
|
(1,414
|
)
|
(11,994
|
)
|
(18,242
|
)
|
||||
Other
income (expense), net:
|
||||||||||
Interest
income
|
425
|
52
|
85
|
|||||||
Interest
expense
|
(104
|
)
|
(183
|
)
|
(91
|
)
|
||||
Other,
net
|
(3
|
)
|
(130
|
)
|
54
|
|||||
Total
other income (expense), net
|
318
|
(261
|
)
|
48
|
||||||
Loss
from continuing operations before income taxes
|
(1,096
|
)
|
(12,255
|
)
|
(18,194
|
)
|
||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
3,248
|
736
|
1,352
|
|||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
2,152
|
(11,519
|
)
|
(16,842
|
)
|
|||||
Discontinued
operations:
|
||||||||||
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations
|
225
|
2,813
|
(18,813
|
)
|
||||||
Gain
(loss) on disposal of discontinued operations
|
17,851
|
(183
|
)
|
318
|
||||||
Income
tax provision
|
(4,153
|
)
|
(998
|
)
|
(635
|
)
|
||||
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations
|
13,923
|
1,632
|
(19,130
|
)
|
||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
16,075
|
$
|
(9,887
|
)
|
$
|
(35,972
|
)
|
||
Comprehensive
income (loss):
|
||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
16,075
|
$
|
(9,887
|
)
|
$
|
(35,972
|
)
|
||
Foreign
currency translation adjustments
|
112
|
(8
|
)
|
1,197
|
||||||
Less:
reclassification adjustments for foreign currency
translation
|
||||||||||
adjustments
included in net income (loss)
|
(1,301
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
Comprehensive
income (loss):
|
$
|
14,886
|
$
|
(9,895
|
)
|
$
|
(34,775
|
)
|
||
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial
statements
|
F-5
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
(CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Basic
earnings (loss) per common share from continuing
operations
|
$
|
0.19
|
$
|
(1.04
|
)
|
$
|
(1.50
|
)
|
||
Diluted
earnings (loss) per common share from continuing
operations
|
$
|
0.17
|
$
|
(1.04
|
)
|
$
|
(1.50
|
)
|
||
Basic
earnings (loss) per common share from discontinued
operations
|
$
|
1.25
|
$
|
0.15
|
$
|
(1.71
|
)
|
|||
Diluted
earnings (loss) per common share from discontinued
operations
|
$
|
1.13
|
$
|
0.15
|
$
|
(1.71
|
)
|
|||
Basic
earnings (loss) per common share
|
$
|
1.44
|
$
|
(0.89
|
)
|
$
|
(3.21
|
)
|
||
Diluted
earnings (loss) per common share
|
$
|
1.30
|
$
|
(0.89
|
)
|
$
|
(3.21
|
)
|
||
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial
statements
|
F-6
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Accumulated
|
Retained
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Additional
|
Other
|
Earnings
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Common
Stock
|
Paid-In
|
Deferred
|
Comprehensive
|
(Accumulated
|
Shareholders'
|
|||||||||||||||||
Shares
|
Amount
|
Capital
|
Compensation
|
Income
|
Deficit)
|
Equity
|
||||||||||||||||
Balances
at June 30, 2002
|
11,178,392
|
$
|
11
|
$
|
48,704
|
$
|
(147
|
)
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
5,324
|
$
|
53,892
|
||||||||
Issuance
of Common Shares pursuant to exercises of stock options
|
31,500
|
-
|
86
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
86
|
|||||||||||||||
Issuance
of Common Shares under Employee Stock Purchase Plan
|
1,841
|
-
|
8
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
8
|
|||||||||||||||
Repurchase
and retirement of Common Shares
|
(125,000
|
)
|
-
|
(430
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(430
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Deferred
compensation resulting from the modification of stock
options
|
-
|
-
|
(110
|
)
|
110
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||||
Net
reversal of previously amortized deferred compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(38
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
(38
|
)
|
|||||||||||||
Foreign
currency translation adjustments
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
1,197
|
-
|
1,197
|
|||||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(35,972
|
)
|
(35,972
|
)
|
|||||||||||||
Balances
at June 30, 2003
|
11,086,733
|
11
|
48,258
|
(75
|
)
|
1,197
|
(30,648
|
)
|
18,743
|
|||||||||||||
Repurchase
and retirement of Common Shares per settlement agreements
with
former executive officers
|
(50,500
|
)
|
-
|
(63
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(63
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Compensation
expense resulting from the modification of stock options
|
-
|
-
|
200
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
200
|
|||||||||||||||
Amortization
of deferred compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
21
|
-
|
-
|
21
|
|||||||||||||||
Foreign
currency translation adjustments
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(8
|
)
|
-
|
(8
|
)
|
|||||||||||||
Net
loss
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(9,887
|
)
|
(9,887
|
)
|
|||||||||||||
Balances
at June 30, 2004
|
11,036,233
|
11
|
48,395
|
(54
|
)
|
1,189
|
(40,535
|
)
|
9,006
|
|||||||||||||
Issuance
of Common Shares related to shareholder settlement
agreement
|
228,000
|
-
|
957
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
957
|
|||||||||||||||
Compensation
expense resulting from the modification of stock options
|
-
|
-
|
41
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
41
|
|||||||||||||||
Amortization
of deferred compensation
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
21
|
-
|
-
|
21
|
|||||||||||||||
Foreign
currency translation adjustments
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
(1,189
|
)
|
-
|
(1,189
|
)
|
|||||||||||||
Net
income
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
16,075
|
16,075
|
|||||||||||||||
Balances
at June 30, 2005
|
11,264,233
|
$
|
11
|
$
|
49,393
|
$
|
(33
|
)
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(24,460
|
)
|
$
|
24,911
|
|||||||
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial
statements
|
F-7
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
||||||||||
Net
income (loss) from continuing operations
|
$
|
2,152
|
$
|
(11,519
|
)
|
$
|
(16,842
|
)
|
||
Adjustments
to reconcile net income (loss) from continuing operations
|
||||||||||
to
net cash provided by operations:
|
||||||||||
Loss
on impairment of long-lived assets, goodwill, and
intangibles
|
180
|
-
|
5,102
|
|||||||
Depreciation
and amortization expense
|
2,366
|
1,934
|
1,805
|
|||||||
Deferred
income taxes
|
-
|
3,079
|
2,224
|
|||||||
Stock-based
compensation
|
62
|
221
|
(38
|
)
|
||||||
Write-off
of inventory
|
250
|
2,696
|
2,175
|
|||||||
(Gain)
loss on disposal of assets and fixed assets write-offs
|
(12
|
)
|
154
|
(2
|
)
|
|||||
Provision
for doubtful accounts
|
46
|
24
|
-
|
|||||||
Purchase
accounting adjustment
|
395
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
||||||||||
Accounts
receivable
|
(692
|
)
|
(6,140
|
)
|
(177
|
)
|
||||
Inventories
|
15
|
(31
|
)
|
1,604
|
||||||
Prepaid
expenses and other assets
|
220
|
(296
|
)
|
(126
|
)
|
|||||
Accounts
payable
|
233
|
399
|
(580
|
)
|
||||||
Restructuring
charge
|
110
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Accrued
liabilities
|
(4,237
|
)
|
2,300
|
6,042
|
||||||
Income
taxes
|
(585
|
)
|
(609
|
)
|
(2,893
|
)
|
||||
Deferred
product revenue
|
(1,052
|
)
|
6,107
|
-
|
||||||
Net
change in other assets/liabilities
|
11
|
1
|
48
|
|||||||
Net
cash used in continuing operating activities
|
(538
|
)
|
(1,680
|
)
|
(1,658
|
)
|
||||
Net
cash provided by discontinued operating activities
|
168
|
2,764
|
4,201
|
|||||||
Net
cash (used in) provided by operating activities
|
(370
|
)
|
1,084
|
2,543
|
||||||
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
||||||||||
Restricted
cash
|
-
|
200
|
(200
|
)
|
||||||
Purchase
of property and equipment
|
(1,136
|
)
|
(1,685
|
)
|
(1,402
|
)
|
||||
Proceeds
from the sale of property and equipment
|
8
|
5
|
4
|
|||||||
Proceeds
from the sale of assets
|
-
|
-
|
80
|
|||||||
Purchase
of marketable securities
|
(47,100
|
)
|
(3,350
|
)
|
(18,500
|
)
|
||||
Sale
of marketable securities
|
33,050
|
3,500
|
29,000
|
|||||||
Net
cash (used in) provided by continuing investing activities
|
(15,178
|
)
|
(1,330
|
)
|
8,982
|
|||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) discontinued investing
activities
|
14,173
|
(147
|
)
|
(7,665
|
)
|
|||||
Net
cash (used in) provided by investing activities
|
(1,005
|
)
|
(1,477
|
)
|
1,317
|
|||||
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
||||||||||
Borrowings
under note payable
|
-
|
-
|
1,998
|
|||||||
Principal
payments on capital lease obligations
|
(8
|
)
|
(32
|
)
|
(61
|
)
|
||||
Principal
payments on note payable
|
(932
|
)
|
(652
|
)
|
(414
|
)
|
||||
Proceeds
from sales of Common Shares
|
-
|
-
|
95
|
|||||||
Purchase
and retirement of Common Shares
|
-
|
(63
|
)
|
(430
|
)
|
|||||
Net
cash (used in) provided by continuing financing activities
|
(940
|
)
|
(747
|
)
|
1,188
|
|||||
Net
cash used in discontinued financing activities
|
-
|
(770
|
)
|
(723
|
)
|
|||||
Net
cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
(940
|
)
|
(1,517
|
)
|
465
|
|||||
Net
(decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
(2,315
|
)
|
(1,910
|
)
|
4,325
|
|||||
Effect
of foreign exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents
|
-
|
(7
|
)
|
55
|
||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at the beginning of the year
|
4,207
|
6,124
|
1,744
|
|||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at the end of the year
|
$
|
1,892
|
$
|
4,207
|
$
|
6,124
|
||||
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial
statements
|
F-8
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Supplemental
disclosure of cash flow information:
|
||||||||||
Cash
paid for interest
|
$
|
104
|
$
|
282
|
$
|
211
|
||||
Cash
paid (received) for income taxes
|
1,117
|
(2,189
|
)
|
(79
|
)
|
|||||
Supplemental
disclosure of non-cash financing activities:
|
||||||||||
Value
of common shares issued in shareholder settlement
|
$
|
957
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
||||
Supplemental
disclosure of acquisition activity:
|
||||||||||
Fair
value of assets acquired
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
8,235
|
||||
Liabilities
assumed
|
-
|
-
|
(599
|
)
|
||||||
Cash
paid for acquisition
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
7,636
|
||||
See
accompanying notes to consolidated financial
statements
|
F-9
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
1. |
Organization
- Nature
of Operations
|
ClearOne
Communications, Inc., a Utah corporation, and its subsidiaries
(collectively,
the “Company”) develop, manufacture, market, and service a comprehensive line
of
audio conferencing products, which range from tabletop conferencing
phones to
professionally installed audio systems. The Company’s solutions create a natural
communication environment, designed to save organizations time
and money by
enabling more effective and efficient communication between geographically
separated businesses, employees, and customers.
The
Company’s end-user customers include large companies, government organizations,
educational institutions, and small and medium-sized businesses.
The Company
mostly sells its products to these end-user customers through a
two-tier
distribution network of independent distributors who then sell
the products to
dealers, including independent systems integrators and value-added
resellers.
The Company also sells its products on a limited basis directly
to certain
dealers, system integrators, value-added resellers, and end-users.
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004, the Company decided to discontinue
operations of a portion of its business services segment and its
conferencing
services segment. As discussed in Note 4, in May 2004, the Company
sold certain
assets of its U.S. audiovisual integration services operations
to M:Space, Inc.
(“M:Space”). During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, the Company sold
its
conferencing services segment to Clarinet, Inc., an affiliate of
American
Teleconferencing Services, Ltd. doing business as Premiere Conferencing
(“Premiere”) and the Company sold all of the issued and outstanding shares
of
its Canadian subsidiary, ClearOne Communications of Canada, Inc.
(“ClearOne
Canada”) to 6351352 Canada Inc., which is a portion of the Company’s business
services segment. ClearOne Canada owned all the issued and outstanding
stock of
Stechyson Electronics Ltd., which conducts business under the name
of OM Video.
All of these operations and related net assets are presented in
discontinued
operations and assets and liabilities held for sale in the accompanying
consolidated financial statements. Following the dispositions of
these
operations, the Company has returned to its core competency of
developing,
manufacturing, and marketing audio conferencing products.
2. |
Summary
of Significant Accounting
Policies
|
Consolidation
- These
consolidated financial statements include the financial statements
of ClearOne
Communications, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiaries, ClearOne
Communications
EuMEA GmbH, ClearOne Communications Limited UK, E.mergent, Inc.,
and Gentner
Communications Ltd. - Ireland. The discontinued operations portion
of these
consolidated financial statements include the financial statements
of our
previously wholly owned subsidiaries, ClearOne Communications of
Canada, Inc.
and OM Video, which were sold in March 2005. All intercompany accounts
and
transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
Pervasiveness
of Estimates
- The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally
accepted
accounting principles in the United States of America requires
management to
make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts
of assets and
liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities
at the date of
the financial statements and the reported amounts of sales and
expenses during
the reporting periods. Key estimates in the accompanying consolidated
financial
statements include, among others, revenue recognition, allowances
for doubtful
accounts and product returns, provisions for obsolete inventory,
valuation of
long-lived assets including goodwill, and deferred income tax asset
valuation
allowances. Actual results could differ materially from these estimates.
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
- The
carrying values of cash equivalents, marketable securities, accounts
receivable,
note receivable, accounts payable, and accrued liabilities all
approximate fair
value due to the relatively short-term maturities of these assets
and
liabilities. The carrying values of long-term debt also approximated
fair value
because applicable interest rates either fluctuated based on market
conditions
or approximated the Company’s borrowing rate.
F-10
Foreign
Currency Translation -
The
functional currency for OM Video was the Canadian Dollar. Adjustments
resulting
from the translation of OM Video amounts were recorded as accumulated
other
comprehensive income. The functional currency for the Company’s other foreign
subsidiaries was and is the U.S. Dollar. The results of operations
for the
Company’s other subsidiaries are recorded by the subsidiaries in Euro and
British Pound and remeasured in the U.S. Dollar. Assets and liabilities
are
translated or remeasured into U.S. dollars at the exchange rate
prevailing on
the balance sheet date or the historical rate, as appropriate.
Revenue and
expenses are translated or remeasured at average rates of exchange
prevailing
during the period. The impact from remeasurement of our Germany
and United
Kingdom entities is recorded in the accompanying consolidated statements
of
operations.
Cash
Equivalents
- The
Company considers all highly-liquid investments with a maturity
of three months
or less, when purchased, to be cash equivalents. As of June 30,
2005 and 2004
cash equivalents totaled $1,726 and $3,898, respectively, and consisted
primarily of money market funds. The Company places its temporary
cash
investments with high-quality financial institutions. At times,
including at
June 30, 2005 and 2004, such investments may be in excess of the
Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation insurance limit of $100.
Marketable
Securities
- The
Company’s marketable securities are classified as available-for-sale securities,
are carried at fair value which approximated cost, and were comprised
of
municipal government auction rate notes and auction preferred stock
that have
original maturities of greater than one year. As of June 30, 2005
and 2004
marketable securities totaled $15,800 and $1,750, respectively.
Management
determines the appropriate classifications of investments at the
time of
purchase and reevaluates such designation as of each balance sheet
date.
The
Company considers highly liquid marketable securities with an effective
maturity
to the Company of less than one year to be current assets. The
Company defines
effective maturity as the shorter of the original maturity to the
Company or the
effective maturity as a result of periodic auction or optional
redemption
features of certain of its investments. Such investments are expected
to be
realized in cash or sold or consumed during the normal operating
cycles of the
business. As of June 30, 2005 and 2004, all marketable securities
were
classified as current assets and consisted of municipal government
auction rate
notes.
The
Company regularly monitors and evaluates the value of its marketable
securities.
When assessing marketable securities for other-than-temporary declines
in value,
the Company considers such factors, among other things, as how
significant the
decline in value is as a percentage of the original cost, how long
the market
value of the investment has been less than its original cost, the
collateral
supporting the investments, insurance policies which protect the
Company’s
investment position, the interval between auction periods, whether
or not there
have been any failed auctions, and the credit rating issued for
the securities
by one or more of the major credit rating agencies. A decline in
the market
value of any available-for-sale security below cost that is deemed
to be
other-than-temporary results in a reduction in carrying amount
to fair value.
The impairment is charged to earnings and a new cost basis for
the security is
established.
For
each
of the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003 realized
gains and
losses upon the sale of available-for-sale securities were insignificant.
Unrealized holding gains and losses, net of the related tax effect
on
available-for-sale securities, are excluded from earnings and are
reported as a
separate component of other comprehensive income until realized.
Unrealized
gains and losses on available-for-sale securities are insignificant
for all
periods and accordingly have not been recorded as a component of
other
comprehensive income. The specific identification method is used
to compute the
realized gains and losses.
Sources
of Supplies
- The
Company depends on an outsource manufacturing strategy for its
products. In
August 2005, the Company entered into a manufacturing agreement
with a
third-party manufacturer (“TPM”). Under the manufacturing agreement, TPM became
the exclusive manufacturer of substantially all the products that
were
previously manufactured at the Company’s Salt Lake City, Utah manufacturing
facility (see Note 27), with the exception of its MAX®
product
line. If TPM experiences difficulties in obtaining sufficient supplies
of
components, component prices become unreasonable, an interruption
in its
operations, or otherwise suffers capacity constraints, the Company
would
experience a delay in shipping these products which would have
a negative impact
on its revenues. Currently, the Company has no second source of
manufacturing
for substantially all of its products.
F-11
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
The
Company has an agreement with an international manufacturer in
China for the
manufacture of its MAX® product line. Should there be any disruption in services
due to natural disaster, economic or political difficulties in
China,
quarantines or other restrictions associated with infectious diseases,
or other
similar events, or any other reason, such disruption would have
a material
adverse effect on the Company’s business. A delay in shipping these products due
to an interruption in the manufacturer’s operations would have a negative impact
on the Company’s revenues. Operating in the international environment exposes
the Company to certain inherent risks, including unexpected changes
in
regulatory requirements and tariffs, and potentially adverse tax
consequences,
which could materially affect the Company’s results of operations.
Accounts
Receivable
-
Accounts receivable are recorded at the invoiced amount. Credit
is granted to
customers without requiring collateral. The allowance for doubtful
accounts is
the Company’s best estimate of the amount of probable credit losses in the
Company’s existing accounts receivable. Management regularly analyzes accounts
receivable including historical write-off experience, customer
concentrations,
customer creditworthiness, and current economic trends when evaluating
the
adequacy of the allowance for doubtful accounts. If the assumptions
that are
used to determine the allowance for doubtful accounts change, the
Company may
have to provide for a greater level of expense in the future periods
or reverse
amounts provided in prior periods.
The
Company’s allowance for doubtful accounts activity for the fiscal years
ended
June 30, 2005 and 2004 were as follows:
Description
|
Balance
at
Beginning
of
Period
|
Charged
to Costs and
Expenses
|
Deductions
|
Balance
at
End
of
Period
|
|||||||||
Year
ended June 30, 2004
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
24
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
24
|
|||||
Year
ended June 30, 2005
|
$
|
24
|
$
|
46
|
$
|
(24
|
)
|
$
|
46
|
Inventories
-
Inventories are valued at the lower of cost or market, with cost
computed on a
first-in, first-out (“FIFO”) basis. Inventoried costs include material, direct
engineering and production costs, and applicable overhead, not
in excess of
estimated realizable value. Consideration is given to obsolescence,
excessive
levels, deterioration, direct selling expenses, and other factors
in evaluating
net realizable value. Consigned inventory includes product that
has been
delivered to customers for which revenue recognition criteria have
not been met.
During the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, the
Company
recorded inventory write-offs of $250, $2,696, and $2,175,
respectively.
Property
and Equipment
-
Property and equipment are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation.
Costs
associated with internally developed software are capitalized in
accordance with
Statement of Position 98-1 (“SOP 98-1”), “Accounting for the Costs of Computer
Software Developed or Obtained for Internal Use.” Expenditures that materially
increase values or capacities or extend useful lives of property
and equipment
are capitalized. Routine maintenance, repairs, and renewal costs
are expensed as
incurred. Gains or losses from the sale or retirement of property
and equipment
are recorded in current operations and the related book value of
the property is
removed from property and equipment accounts and the related accumulated
depreciation and amortization accounts.
Estimated
useful lives are generally two to ten years. Depreciation and amortization
are
calculated over the estimated useful lives of the respective assets
using the
straight-line method. Leasehold improvement amortization is computed
using the
straight-line method over the shorter of the lease term or the
estimated useful
life of the related assets.
F-12
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Goodwill
-
Goodwill represents the excess of costs over fair value of the
net assets of
businesses acquired. On July 1, 2002, the Company adopted all previously
unadopted provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(“SFAS”) No.
142, “Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets,” including the annual impairment
evaluation provisions, and established its annual review for impairment
as June
30. Upon adoption of SFAS No. 142, there was no impairment of the
Company’s
gross goodwill balance of $17,072 from the E.mergent, Inc. acquisition.
Although
goodwill is tested at least annually for impairment, it is tested
more
frequently if events and circumstances indicate that the asset
might be
impaired. An impairment loss is recognized to the extent that the
carrying
amount exceeds the asset’s implied fair value. The impairment testing is
performed at the reporting unit level in two steps: (i) the Company
determines
the fair value of a reporting unit and compares it to its carrying
amount, and
(ii) if the carrying amount of a reporting unit exceeds its implied
fair value,
an impairment loss is recognized for any excess of the carrying
amount of the
reporting unit’s goodwill over the implied fair value of that goodwill. The
implied fair value of goodwill is determined by allocating the
fair value of the
reporting unit in a manner similar to a purchase price allocation
in accordance
with SFAS No. 141, “Business Combinations.” As more fully discussed in Notes 9
and 10, goodwill was impaired during the fiscal year ended June
30,
2003.
Intangibles
-
Definite-lived intangibles are subject to amortization. The Company
uses the
straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the asset.
All of the
Company’s intangible assets, consisting of patents and a non-compete agreement,
as of June 30, 2005 and 2004 were determined to be definite-lived
intangible
assets.
Impairment
of Long-Lived Assets
- On
July 1, 2002, the Company adopted SFAS No. 144, “Accounting for the Impairment
or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,” whereby long-lived assets, such as property,
equipment, and definite-lived intangibles subject to amortization,
are reviewed
for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate
that the
carrying value of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability
of assets to
be held and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount
of an asset
or asset group to estimated future undiscounted net cash flows
of the related
asset or group of assets over their remaining lives. If the carrying
amount of
an asset exceeds its estimated future undiscounted cash flows,
an impairment
charge is recognized for the amount by which the carrying amount
exceeds the
estimated fair value of the asset. Impairment of long-lived assets
is assessed
at the lowest levels for which there are identifiable cash flows
that are
independent of other groups of assets. The impairment of long-lived
assets
requires judgments and estimates. If circumstances change, such
estimates could
also change. Assets held for sale are reported at the lower of
the carrying
amount or fair value, less the estimated costs to sell.
Revenue
Recognition
-
Included in continuing operations are two sources of revenue: (i)
product
revenue, primarily from product sales to distributors, dealers,
and end-users;
and (ii) business services revenue, which includes one software
license
agreement associated with our broadcast telephone interface product
line, a
perpetual software license to use the Company’s technology, along with one free
year of maintenance and support, and transition services for 90
days.
Product
revenue is recognized when (i) the products are shipped, (ii) persuasive
evidence of an arrangement exists, (iii) the price is fixed and
determinable,
and (iv) collection is reasonably assured. Beginning in 2001, the
Company
modified its sales channels to include distributors. These distributors
were
generally thinly capitalized with little or no financial resources
and did not
have the wherewithal to pay for these products when delivered by
the Company.
Furthermore, in a substantial number of cases, significant amounts
of
inventories were returned or never paid for and the payment for
product sold (to
both distributors and non-distributors) was regularly subject to
a final
negotiation between the Company and its customers. As a result
of such
negotiations, the Company routinely agreed to significant concessions
from the
originally invoiced amounts to facilitate collection. These practices
continued
to exist through the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003.
Accordingly,
amounts charged to both distributors and non-distributors were
not considered
fixed and determinable or reasonably collectible until cash was
collected and
thus, there was a delay in the Company’s recognition of revenue and related cost
of goods sold from the time of product shipment until invoices
were paid. As a
result, the June 30, 2003 balance sheet reflected no accounts receivable
or
deferred revenue related to product sales. During the fiscal year
ended June 30,
2004, the Company recognized $5,187 in revenues and $1,738 in cost
of goods sold
that were deferred in prior periods since cash had not been collected
as of the
end of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003.
F-13
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
During
the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, the Company had
in place improved
credit policies and procedures, an approval process for sales returns
and credit
memos, processes for managing and monitoring channel inventory
levels, better
trained staff, and discontinued the practice of frequently granting
significant
concessions from the originally invoiced amount. As a result of
these improved
policies and procedures, the Company extends credit to customers
who it believes
have the wherewithal to pay.
The
Company provides a right of return on product sales to distributors.
Currently,
the Company does not have sufficient historical return experience
with its
distributors that is predictive of future events given historical
excess levels
of inventory in the distribution channel. Accordingly, revenue
from product
sales to distributors is not recognized until the return privilege
has expired,
which approximates when product is sold-through to customers of
the Company’s
distributors (dealers, system integrators, value-added resellers,
and
end-users). As of June 30, 2004, the Company deferred $6,195 in
revenue and
$2,381 in cost of goods sold related to products sold where return
rights had
not lapsed. As of June 30, 2005, the Company deferred $5,055 in
revenue and
$2,297 in cost of goods sold related to products sold where return
rights had
not lapsed. The amounts of deferred cost of goods sold were included
in
consigned inventory.
The
Company offers rebates and market development funds to certain
of its
distributors based upon volume of product purchased by such distributors.
The
Company records rebates as a reduction of revenue in accordance
with Emerging
Issues Task Force (“EITF”) Issue No. 00-22, “Accounting for Points and Certain
Other Time-Based or Volume-Based Sales Incentive Offers, and Offers
for Free
Products or Services to Be Delivered in the Future.” Beginning January 1, 2002,
the Company adopted EITF Issue No. 01-9, “Accounting for Consideration Given by
a Vendor to a Customer (Including a Reseller of the Vendor’s Products).” The
Company continues to record rebates as a reduction of revenue in
the period
revenue is recognized.
The
Company provides advance replacement units to end-users on defective
units of
certain products within 90 days of purchase date by the end-user.
Since the
purpose of these units are not revenue generating, the Company
tracks the units
due from the end-user, valued at retail price, until the defective
unit has been
returned, but no receivable balance is maintained on the Company’s balance
sheet. Retail price value of in-transit advance replacement units
was $81 and
$91, as of June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Business
services activities, included in continuing operations, includes
one software
license agreement with Comrex associated with the broadcast telephone
interface
product line, a perpetual software license to use the Company’s technology,
along with one free year of maintenance and support, and transition
services for
90 days.
Business
services activities, which have been classified in discontinued
operations,
involve designing and constructing conference systems under fixed-price
contracts. Revenues from fixed-priced construction contracts are
recognized on
the completed-contract method. This method is used because the
typical contract
is completed in three months or less and the financial position
and results of
operations do not vary significantly from those which would result
from use of
the percentage-of-completion method. A contract is considered complete
when all
costs except insignificant items have been incurred and the installation
is
operating according to specification or has been accepted by the
customer.
Contract costs include all direct material and labor costs. Provisions
for
estimated losses on uncompleted contracts are made in the period
in which such
losses are determined.
Revenue
from maintenance contracts on conference systems is recognized
on a
straight-line basis over the maintenance period pursuant to Financial
Accounting
Standards Board (“FASB”) Technical Bulletin No. 90-1, “Accounting for Separately
Priced Extended Warranty and Product Maintenance Contracts.”
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004, the Company sold its U.S.
audiovisual
integration business services operations as discussed in Note 4.
On March 4,
2005, the Company sold its Canadian audiovisual integration business
services
operations as discussed in Note 4.
Conferencing
services revenue, which has been classified in discontinued operations,
primarily from full service conference calling and on-demand, reservationless
conference calling is recognized at the time of customer usage,
and is based
upon minutes used. On July 1, 2004, the Company sold its conferencing
services
business segment to Premiere as discussed in Note 4.
F-14
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Shipping
and Handling Costs
-
Shipping and handling billed to customers is recorded as revenue.
Shipping and
handling costs are included in cost of goods sold.
Warranty
Costs
- The
Company accrues for warranty costs based on estimated warranty
return rates and
estimated costs to repair. Factors that affect the Company’s warranty liability
include the number of units sold, historical and anticipated rates
of warranty
returns, and repair cost. The Company reviews the adequacy of its
recorded
warranty accrual on a quarterly basis.
Changes
in the Company’s warranty accrual during the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005
and 2004 were as follows:
Years
Ended June 30,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Balance
at the beginning of year
|
$
|
108
|
$
|
80
|
|||
Accruals/additions
|
174
|
206
|
|||||
Usage
|
(156
|
)
|
(178
|
)
|
|||
Balance
at end of year
|
$
|
126
|
$
|
108
|
Advertising
-
The
Company expenses advertising costs as incurred. Advertising expenses
consist of
trade shows and magazine advertisements. Advertising expenses for
the fiscal
years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003 totaled $637, $716, and
$361,
respectively, and are included in the caption Marketing and Selling.
Research
and Product Development Costs
- The
Company expenses research and product development costs as incurred.
Income
Taxes
- The
Company uses the asset and liability method of accounting for income
taxes.
Under the asset and liability method, deferred tax assets and liabilities
are
recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to temporary
differences
between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets
and
liabilities and their respective tax bases, and operating loss
and tax credit
carry-forwards. These temporary differences will result in taxable
or deductible
amounts in future years when the reported amounts of the assets
or liabilities
are recovered or settled. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are
measured using
enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years
in which
those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled.
The effect
on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates
is recognized in
income in the period that includes the enactment date. A valuation
allowance is
provided when it is more likely than not that some or all of the
deferred tax
assets may not be realized. The Company evaluates the realizability
of its net
deferred tax assets on a quarterly basis and valuation allowances
are provided,
as necessary. Adjustments to the valuation allowance will increase
or decrease
the Company’s income tax provision or benefit.
F-15
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Earnings
Per Share
- The
following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted
earnings (loss)
per common share:
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Numerator:
|
||||||||||
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
$
|
2,152
|
$
|
(11,519
|
)
|
$
|
(16,842
|
)
|
||
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax
|
173
|
1,747
|
(19,330
|
)
|
||||||
Gain
(loss) on disposal of discontinued operations, net of
tax
|
13,750
|
(115
|
)
|
200
|
||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$
|
16,075
|
$
|
(9,887
|
)
|
$
|
(35,972
|
)
|
||
Denominator:
|
||||||||||
Basic
weighted average shares
|
11,177,406
|
11,057,896
|
11,183,339
|
|||||||
Dilutive
common stock equivalents using treasury stock method
|
1,154,700
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Diluted
weighted average shares
|
12,332,106
|
11,057,896
|
11,183,339
|
|||||||
Basic
earnings (loss) per common share:
|
||||||||||
Continuing
operations
|
$
|
0.19
|
$
|
(1.04
|
)
|
$
|
(1.50
|
)
|
||
Discontinued
operations
|
0.02
|
0.16
|
(1.73
|
)
|
||||||
Disposal
of discontinued operations
|
1.23
|
(0.01
|
)
|
0.02
|
||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
1.44
|
(0.89
|
)
|
(3.21
|
)
|
|||||
Diluted
earnings (loss) per common share:
|
||||||||||
Continuing
operations
|
$
|
0.17
|
$
|
(1.04
|
)
|
$
|
(1.50
|
)
|
||
Discontinued
operations
|
0.01
|
0.16
|
(1.73
|
)
|
||||||
Disposal
of discontinued operations
|
1.12
|
(0.01
|
)
|
0.02
|
||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
1.30
|
(0.89
|
)
|
(3.21
|
)
|
Options
to purchase 1,397,239, 1,433,187 and 1,972,756 shares of common
stock were
outstanding as of June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively,
but were not
included in the computation of diluted earnings per share as the
effect would be
anti-dilutive. Warrants to purchase 150,000 shares of common stock
were
outstanding as of June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, but were not included
in the
computation of diluted earnings per share as the effect would be
anti-dilutive.
During fiscal 2004, the Company entered into a settlement agreement
related to
the shareholders’ class action and agreed to issue 1.2 million shares of its
common stock; however, certain of these shares were settled in
cash in lieu of
common stock (see Note 15). The Company issued 228,000 shares in
November 2004
and 920,494 shares in September 2005. These shares are not included
in the
fiscal 2004 weighted average share calculations as their inclusion
would have
been anti-dilutive.
Stock-Based
Compensation
- The
Company accounts for stock-based compensation issued to directors,
officers, and
employees in accordance with the provisions of Accounting Principles
Board
(“APB”) Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” and related
interpretations. Under APB No. 25, compensation expense is recognized
if an
option’s exercise price on the measurement date is below the fair market
value
of the Company’s common stock. The compensation expense, if any, is amortized
to
expense over the vesting period.
SFAS
No.
123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” requires pro forma information
regarding net income (loss) as if the Company had accounted for
its stock
options granted under the fair value method prescribed by SFAS
No. 123. The fair
value of the options and employee stock purchase rights is estimated
using the
Black-Scholes option pricing model. For purposes of the pro forma
disclosures,
the estimated fair value of the stock options is amortized over
the vesting
periods of the respective stock options.
F-16
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
In
December 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 148, “Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation - Transition and Disclosure, an amendment of FASB
Statement No.
123.” This Statement amends SFAS No. 123, to provide alternative methods
of
transition for a voluntary change to the fair value method of accounting
for
stock-based employee compensation. In addition, this Statement
amends the
disclosure requirements of Statement No. 123 to require prominent
disclosures in
both annual and interim financial statements. Certain of the disclosure
modifications are required for fiscal years ending after December
15, 2002.
The
following is the pro forma disclosure and the related impact on
the net income
(loss) attributable to common shareholders and net earnings (loss)
per common
share for the years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003.
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Net
income (loss):
|
||||||||||
As
reported
|
$
|
16,075
|
$
|
(9,887
|
)
|
$
|
(35,972
|
)
|
||
Stock-based
employee compensation expense included in
|
||||||||||
reported
net loss, net of income taxes
|
13
|
13
|
(24
|
)
|
||||||
Stock-based
employee compensation expense determined
|
||||||||||
under
the fair-value method for all awards, net of income taxes
|
(664
|
)
|
(439
|
)
|
(966
|
)
|
||||
Pro
forma
|
$
|
15,424
|
$
|
(10,313
|
)
|
$
|
(36,962
|
)
|
||
Basic
earnings (loss) per common share:
|
||||||||||
As
reported
|
$
|
1.44
|
$
|
(0.89
|
)
|
$
|
(3.21
|
)
|
||
Pro
forma
|
1.38
|
(0.93
|
)
|
(3.31
|
)
|
|||||
Diluted
earnings (loss) per common share:
|
||||||||||
As
reported
|
$
|
1.30
|
$
|
(0.89
|
)
|
$
|
(3.21
|
)
|
||
Pro
forma
|
1.25
|
(0.93
|
)
|
(3.31
|
)
|
Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment
In
March
2004, the FASB issued EITF No. 03-01, “The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment and its Application to Certain Investments,” which provides new
guidance for assessing impairment losses on debt and equity investments.
The new
impairment model applies to investments accounted for under the
cost or equity
method and investments accounted for under SFAS 115, “Accounting for Certain
Investments in Debt and Equity Securities.” EITF No. 03-01 also includes new
disclosure requirements for cost method investments and for all
investments that
are in an unrealized loss position. In September 2004, the FASB
delayed the
accounting provisions of EITF No. 03-01; however the disclosure
requirements
remain effective. The Company does not expect the adoption of this
EITF to have
a material impact on its business, results of operations, financial
position, or
liquidity.
Inventory
Costs
In
November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, “Inventory Costs - an Amendment of
ARB No. 43”, which is the result of its efforts to converge U.S. accounting
standards for inventories with International Accounting Standards.
SFAS No. 151
requires idle facility expenses, freight, handling costs, and wasted
material
(spoilage) costs to be recognized as current-period charges. It
also requires
that allocation of fixed production overheads to the costs of conversion
be
based on the normal capacity of the production facilities. SFAS
No. 151 will be
effective beginning with the Company’s fiscal 2006 financial statements. The
Company does not anticipate that the implementation of this standard
will have a
significant impact on its business, results of operations, financial
position,
or liquidity.
F-17
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Share-Based
Payment
In
December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R, “Share-Based Payment.”
SFAS 123R is a revision of SFAS 123. SFAS 123R establishes standards
for the
accounting for transactions in which an entity exchanges its equity
instruments
for goods or services. Primarily, SFAS 123R focuses on accounting
for
transactions in which an entity obtains employee services in share-based
payment
transactions. It also addresses transactions in which an entity
incurs
liabilities in exchange for goods or services that are based on
the fair value
of the entity’s equity instruments or that may be settled by the issuance of
those equity instruments.
SFAS
123R
requires the Company to measure the cost of employee services received
in
exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date
fair value
of the award (with limited exceptions). That cost will be recognized
over the
period during which an employee is required to provide service
in exchange for
the award - the requisite service period (usually the vesting period).
No
compensation cost is recognized for equity instruments for which
employees do
not render the requisite service. Therefore, if an employee does
not ultimately
render the requisite service, the costs recognized related to unvested
options
will be reversed.
In
accordance with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”)’s Staff
Accounting Bulletin 107, SFAS 123R is effective as of the beginning
of the
annual reporting period that begins after June 15, 2005. Under these
guidelines, the Company will adopt SFAS 123R as of the beginning
of the first
quarter of fiscal year 2006 starting July 1, 2005. The Company
expects this
statement to have a significantly adverse impact on its future
results of
operations.
Accounting
Changes and Error Corrections
In
May
2005, the FASB issued SFAS No. 154, “Accounting Changes and Error Corrections -
a Replacement of APB Opinion No. 20 and FASB Statement No. 3” in order to
converge U.S. Accounting Standards with International Accounting
Standards. SFAS
No. 154 changes the requirements for the accounting for and reporting
of a
change in accounting principle. Previously, most voluntary changes
in accounting
principles required recognition of a cumulative effect adjustment
within net
income of the period of the change. SFAS No. 154 requires retrospective
application to prior periods’ financial statements, unless it is impracticable
to determine either the period-specific effects or the cumulative
effect of the
change. SFAS No. 154 is effective for accounting changes made in
fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2005; however, it does not change
the transition
provisions of any existing accounting pronouncements. The Company
does not
believe the adoption of SFAS No. 154 will have a material effect
on its
business, results of operations, financial position, or liquidity.
Accounting
for Asset Retirement Obligations in the European Union
In
June
2005, the FASB issued a FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) interpreting SFAS No. 143,
“Accounting for Asset Retirement Obligations,” specifically FSP
143-1,
“Accounting for Electronic Equipment Waste Obligations”. FSP
143-1
addresses the accounting for obligations associated with Directive
2002/96/EC,
Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment, which was adopted by
the European
Union (“EU”). The FSP provides guidance on how to account for the effects
of the
Directive but only with respect to historical waste associated
with products
placed on the market on or before August 13, 2005.
FSP
143-1 will be effective beginning with the Company’s fiscal 2006 financial
statements. The
Company does not believe the adoption of FSP 143-1 will have a
material effect
on its business, results of operations, financial position, or
liquidity.
Reclassifications
Certain
reclassifications have been made to the prior years’ consolidated financial
statements and notes to consolidated financial statements to conform
to the
current year’s presentation.
F-18
3. |
Acquisitions
|
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2002, the Company completed the
acquisition of
E.mergent, Inc., (“E.mergent”), a manufacturer of cameras and conferencing
furniture and an audiovisual integration services provider. During
the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2003, the Company completed the acquisition
of Stechyson
Electronics Ltd., doing business as OM Video (“OM Video”), an audiovisual
integration services company. The total consideration for each
acquisition was
based on negotiations between the Company and the acquired company’s
shareholders that took into account a number of factors of the
business,
including historical revenues, operating history, products, intellectual
property, and other factors. Each acquisition was accounted for
under the
purchase method of accounting. The operations of each acquisition
are included
in the accompanying statements of operations for the period since
the date of
each acquisition.
Accounting
for the acquisition of a business requires an allocation of the
purchase price
to the assets acquired and the liabilities assumed in the transaction
at their
respective estimated fair values. The Company used information
available at the
date of the acquisitions to estimate the individual fair values
of properties,
equipment, identifiable intangible assets, and liabilities to make
these fair
value determinations and, for significant business acquisitions,
engaged
third-party valuation firms to assist in the fair value determinations
of the
acquired net assets. The following summarizes the consideration
and purchase
price allocations of each acquisition:
E.mergent
|
OM
Video
|
||||||
Cash
|
$
|
7,300
|
$
|
6,276
|
|||
Holdback
account
|
-
|
600
|
|||||
Common
stock and fully-vested options
|
14,427
|
-
|
|||||
Direct
acquisition costs
|
603
|
110
|
|||||
Total
consideration
|
$
|
22,330
|
$
|
6,986
|
|||
Net
tangible assets acquired
|
$
|
3,591
|
$
|
337
|
|||
Intangible
assets:
|
|||||||
Patents
and trademarks
|
1,060
|
-
|
|||||
Customer
relationships
|
392
|
-
|
|||||
Non-compete
agreements
|
215
|
574
|
|||||
Goodwill
|
17,072
|
6,075
|
|||||
Total
purchase price allocation
|
$
|
22,330
|
$
|
6,986
|
E.mergent
On
May
31, 2002, the Company completed its acquisition of E.mergent pursuant
to the
terms of an Agreement and Plan of Merger dated January 21, 2002
whereby the
Company paid $7,300 of cash and issued 868,691 shares of common
stock valued at
$16.55 per share to former E.mergent stockholders.
In
addition to the shares of the Company’s common stock issued, the Company assumed
all options to purchase E.mergent common stock that were vested
and outstanding
on the acquisition date. These options were converted into rights
to acquire a
total of 4,158 shares of the Company’s common stock at a weighted average
exercise price of $8.48 per share. A
value
of approximately $49 was assigned to these options using the Black-Scholes
option pricing model with the following assumptions: expected dividend
yield of
0 percent, risk-free interest rate of 2.9 percent, expected volatility
of 81.8
percent, and an expected life of two years.
F-19
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
As
of the
acquisition date, the Company acquired tangible assets consisting
of cash of
$68, accounts receivable of $2,201, inventory of $3,270, property
and equipment
of $475 and other assets of $1,341. The Company assumed liabilities
consisting
of accounts payable of $1,284, line of credit borrowings of $484,
unearned
maintenance revenue of $873, accrued compensation (other than severance)
and
other accrued liabilities of $656. The Company incurred severance
costs of
approximately $468 related to the termination of four E.mergent
executives and
seven other E.mergent employees as a result of duplication of positions
upon
consummation of the acquisition. In June 2002, $52 was paid to
such individuals.
The severance accrual of $416 as of June 30, 2002 was paid during
the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2003.
With
the
assistance of a third-party valuation firm and after considering
the facts and
circumstances surrounding the acquisition, the Company recorded
intangible
assets related to customer relationships, patents, a non-compete
agreement, and
goodwill. Amortization expense of $437 was recorded for customer
relationships,
patents, and a non-compete agreement. Customer relationships had
estimated
useful lives of 18 months to three years and patents had estimated
useful lives
of fifteen years. The term of the non-compete agreement was three
years.
The
Company’s management, at the time, believed the E.mergent acquisition would
complement the Company’s existing operations and that core competencies would
allow the Company to acquire market share in the audiovisual integration
industry. However, the Company’s entry into the services business was perceived
as a threat by its systems integrators and value-added resellers,
since the
Company began competing against many of them for sales. In order
to avoid this
conflict and to maintain good relationships with its systems integrators
and
value-added resellers, the Company decided to stop pursuing new
services
contracts in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended June 30,
2003 which was
considered a triggering event for evaluation of impairment. Ultimately,
the
Company exited the U.S. audiovisual integration market and subsequently
sold its
U.S. audiovisual integration business to M:Space in May 2004 (see
Note 4).
Although the Company continues to sell camera and furniture products
acquired
from E.mergent, its decision to exit the U.S. integration services
market
adversely affected future cash flows. The Company determined that
a triggering
event occurred in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended June
30, 2003. The
Company performed an impairment test and determined that an impairment
loss on
the integration services-related E.mergent assets of approximately
$12,473
should be recognized. The Company also determined that an impairment
loss on
other acquired E.mergent assets of approximately $5,102 should
be recognized
(see Note 10). The U.S. audiovisual integration business operations
and related
net assets are included in discontinued operations in the accompanying
consolidated financial statements.
OM
Video
On
August
27, 2002, the Company purchased all of the outstanding shares of
OM Video,
headquartered in Ottawa, Canada. Under the terms of the agreement,
the
shareholders of OM Video received $6,276 in cash at closing. During
the fiscal
years ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, the Company paid an additional
$500 of a
potential $600 that was held pending certain representations and
warranties
associated with the acquisition. During the second quarter of fiscal
2003, the
Company also paid $750 of a potential $800 earn-out provision.
The earn-out
provision was not considered as part of the original purchase price
allocation
and was recorded as additional consideration and booked to goodwill.
No further
payment related to the holdback or contingent consideration will
be paid.
Accordingly, the total cash payments associated with the acquisition
were
approximately $7,526.
As
of the
acquisition date, the Company acquired tangible assets consisting
of cash of
$193, accounts receivable of $470, inventory of $122, property
and equipment of
$145, and prepaid expenses of $6. The Company assumed liabilities
consisting
primarily of accrued liabilities of $378 and accrued tax liabilities
of $221.
The Company obtained a non-compete agreement with a term of two
years from a
former owner of OM Video.
The
Company’s management, at the time, believed the OM Video acquisition would
complement the Company’s existing operations and that core competencies would
allow the Company to acquire market share in the audiovisual integration
industry. However, the Company’s entry into the services business was perceived
as a threat by its systems integrators and value-added resellers,
since the
Company began competing against many of them for sales. In order
to avoid this
conflict and to maintain good relationships with its systems integrators
and
value-added resellers, the Company deemphasized the audiovisual
integration
market serving the Ottawa Canada region beginning in the fourth
quarter of the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. This decision was considered a
triggering event
for evaluation of impairment. On June 30, 2003, the Company performed
an
impairment test and determined that an impairment loss on the OM
Video assets of
approximately $8,426 should be recognized (see Note 10). On March
4, 2005, the
Company sold all of its Canadian audiovisual integration business
(see Note 4).
F-20
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Pro
Forma
Financial Information
The
following unaudited pro forma combined financial information reflects
operations
as if the acquisitions of E.mergent, Inc. and OM Video, that are
included in
discontinued operations, had occurred as of July 1, 2002. The unaudited
pro
forma combined financial information is presented for illustrative
purposes only
and is not indicative of what the Company’s actual results of operations may
have been had the acquisitions been consummated on July 1, 2002,
respectively.
Year
Ended
|
||||
June
30, 2003
|
||||
Revenue
from discontinued operations
|
$
|
30,162
|
||
Loss
from discontinued operations
|
(19,137
|
)
|
||
Net
loss
|
(35,979
|
)
|
||
Basic
and diluted loss per common share from discontinued
operations
|
$ | (1.71 | ) | |
Basic
and diluted loss per common share from net loss
|
$
|
(3.22
|
)
|
4. |
Discontinued
Operations
|
During
fiscal 2004, the Company completed the sale of its U.S. audiovisual
integration
services to M:Space. During fiscal 2005, the Company completed
the sale of its
conferencing services business component to Premiere and its Canadian
audiovisual integration services to 6351352 Canada Inc. Accordingly,
the results
of operations and the financial position of each of these components
have been
reclassified in the accompanying consolidated financial statements
as
discontinued operations. Additionally, during fiscal 2001 the Company
sold
certain assets whose sales proceeds are included with discontinued
operations
(see Note 5). The following reconciles the financial position of
the components
to the reported amounts as of June 30, 2004.
As
of June 30,
|
||||
2004
|
||||
Assets
held for sale
|
||||
Conferencing
services business
|
$
|
3,294
|
||
OM
Video
|
1,179
|
|||
Total
assets held for sale
|
$
|
4,473
|
||
Liabilities
associated with assets held for sale
|
||||
Conferencing
services business
|
$
|
2,329
|
||
OM
Video
|
738
|
|||
Total
liabilities associated with assets held for sale
|
$
|
3,067
|
F-21
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Summary
operating results of the discontinued operations are as follows:
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations
|
||||||||||
U.S.
audiovisual integration services
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(360
|
)
|
$
|
(14,127
|
)
|
||
Conferencing
services business
|
-
|
2,800
|
3,366
|
|||||||
OM
Video
|
225
|
373
|
(8,052
|
)
|
||||||
Total
income (loss) from discontinued operations
|
225
|
2,813
|
(18,813
|
)
|
||||||
Gain
(loss) on disposal of discontinued operations
|
||||||||||
U.S.
audiovisual integration services
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(276
|
)
|
$
|
-
|
|||
Conferencing
services business
|
17,369
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
OM
Video
|
295
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Burk
(see Note 5)
|
187
|
93
|
318
|
|||||||
Total
gain (loss) on disposal of discontinued operations
|
17,851
|
(183
|
)
|
318
|
||||||
Income
tax (provision) benefit
|
||||||||||
U.S.
audiovisual integration services
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
237
|
$
|
769
|
||||
Conferencing
services business
|
(3,991
|
)
|
(1,044
|
)
|
(1,256
|
)
|
||||
OM
Video
|
(119
|
)
|
(156
|
)
|
(30
|
)
|
||||
Burk
(see Note 5)
|
(43
|
)
|
(35
|
)
|
(118
|
)
|
||||
Total
income tax (provision) benefit
|
(4,153
|
)
|
(998
|
)
|
(635
|
)
|
||||
Total
income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of income
taxes
|
||||||||||
U.S.
audiovisual integration services
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(399
|
)
|
$
|
(13,358
|
)
|
||
Conferencing
services business
|
13,378
|
1,756
|
2,110
|
|||||||
OM
Video
|
401
|
217
|
(8,082
|
)
|
||||||
Burk
(see Note 5)
|
144
|
58
|
200
|
|||||||
Total
income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of income
taxes
|
$ | 13,923 | $ | 1,632 | $ | (19,130 | ) |
M:Space
During
the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003, the
Company decided
to stop pursuing new U.S. business services contracts and impaired
the U.S.
acquired business services assets. The Company did not prepare
any formal
disposition plan at that time and existing customers continued
to be serviced.
During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2004, the Company decided to
sell this
component as many of the existing Company systems integrators and
value-added
resellers perceived the Company’s entry into the business services arena as a
threat since the Company began competing against these same customers
for sales,
as well as the Company’s desire to return to its core competency in the audio
conferencing products segment. U.S. audiovisual integration services
revenues,
reported in discontinued operations, for the years ended June 30,
2004 and 2003
were $3,597 and $7,640, respectively. The U.S. audiovisual integration
services
pre-tax loss, reported in discontinued operations, for the years
ended June 30,
2004 and 2003 were $360 and $14,127, respectively.
On
May 6,
2004, the Company sold certain assets of its U.S. audiovisual integration
services operations to M:Space for no cash compensation. M:Space
is a privately
held audiovisual integration services company. In exchange for
M:Space assuming
obligations for completion of certain customer contracts, and satisfying
maintenance contract obligations to existing customers, the Company
transferred
to M:Space certain assets including inventory valued at $573. The
Company
realized a pre-tax loss on the sale of $276 for the fiscal year
ended June 30,
2004.
F-22
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Summary
operating results of the discontinued operations are as follows:
Years
Ended June 30,
|
|||||||
2004
|
2003
|
||||||
Revenue
- business services
|
$
|
3,597
|
$
|
7,640
|
|||
Cost
of goods sold - business services
|
2,648
|
5,227
|
|||||
Gross
profit
|
949
|
2,413
|
|||||
Marketing
and selling expenses
|
522
|
2,426
|
|||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
787
|
1,641
|
|||||
Impairment
losses
|
-
|
12,473
|
|||||
Loss
before income taxes
|
(360
|
)
|
(14,127
|
)
|
|||
Loss
on disposal of discontinued operations
|
(276
|
)
|
-
|
||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
237
|
769
|
|||||
Loss
from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
$
|
(399
|
)
|
$
|
(13,358
|
)
|
Conferencing
Services
In
April
2004, the Company’s Board of Directors appointed a committee to explore sales
opportunities to sell the conferencing services business component.
The Company
decided to sell this component primarily because of decreasing
margins and
investments in equipment that would have been required in the near
future.
Conferencing services revenues, reported in discontinued operations,
for the
years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003 were $15,578 and $15,268, respectively.
Conferencing services pre-tax income, reported in discontinued
operations, for
the years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, were $2,800 and $3,366,
respectively.
On
July
1, 2004, the Company sold its conferencing services business component
to
Premiere. Consideration for the sale consisted of $21,300 in cash.
Of the
purchase price, $300 was placed into a working capital escrow account
and an
additional $1,000 was placed into an 18-month Indemnity Escrow
account. The
Company received the $300 working capital escrow funds approximately
90 days
after the execution date of the contract. The Company received
the $1,000 in the
Indemnity Escrow account in January 2006. Additionally, $1,365
of the proceeds
was utilized to pay off equipment leases pertaining to assets being
conveyed to
Premiere. The Company realized a pre-tax gain on the sale of $17,369
during the
fiscal year ended June 30, 2005.
The
assets and liabilities of the discontinued operations are presented
separately
under the captions “Assets Held for Sale” and “Liabilities Associated with
Assets Held for Sale,” respectively, in the accompanying balance sheets as of
June 30, 2004 and consist of the following:
As
of June 30,
|
||||
2004
|
||||
Assets
held for sale
|
||||
Accounts
receivable
|
$
|
1,712
|
||
Prepaid
expenses
|
158
|
|||
Property
and equipment, net
|
1,424
|
|||
Total
assets held for sale
|
$
|
3,294
|
||
Liabilities
associated with assets held for sale
|
||||
Capitalized
leases
|
$
|
1,206
|
||
Accounts
payable
|
287
|
|||
Accrued
liabilities
|
836
|
|||
Total
liabilities associated with assets held for sale
|
$
|
2,329
|
F-23
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Summary
operating results of the discontinued operations are as follows:
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Revenue
- conferencing services
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
15,578
|
$
|
15,268
|
||||
Cost
of goods sold - conferencing services
|
-
|
7,844
|
7,904
|
|||||||
Gross
profit
|
-
|
7,734
|
7,364
|
|||||||
Marketing
and selling expenses
|
-
|
3,799
|
2,881
|
|||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
-
|
1,036
|
972
|
|||||||
Other
expense, net
|
-
|
99
|
145
|
|||||||
Income
before income taxes
|
-
|
2,800
|
3,366
|
|||||||
Gain
on disposal of discontinued operations
|
17,369
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Provision
for income taxes
|
(3,991
|
)
|
(1,044
|
)
|
(1,256
|
)
|
||||
Income
from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
$
|
13,378
|
$
|
1,756
|
$
|
2,110
|
OM
Video
In
December 2004, a group of investors approached the Company about
a possible
purchase of OM Video. On January 27, 2005, the Company’s Board of Directors
authorized its Chief Executive Officer to continue discussions
regarding a stock
sale of OM Video, its Canadian audiovisual integration services
business
component. The Company decided to sell this component after it
deemphasized
Canadian Business Services contracts. OM Video revenues, reported
in
discontinued operations, for the years ended June 30, 2005, 2004,
and 2003 were
$3,805, $5,928, and $6,111, respectively. OM Video pre-tax income
(loss),
reported in discontinued operations, for the years ended June 30,
2005, 2004,
and 2003, were $225, $373, and ($8,052), respectively.
On
March
4, 2005, the Company sold all of the issued and outstanding stock
of its
Canadian subsidiary, ClearOne Communications of Canada, Inc. (“ClearOne Canada”)
to 6351352 Canada Inc., a Canada corporation. ClearOne Canada owned
all the
issued and outstanding stock of Stechyson Electronics, Ltd., which
conducts
business under the name OM Video. The Company agreed to sell the
stock of
ClearOne Canada for $200 in cash; a $1,256 note receivable over
a 15-month
period, with interest accruing on the unpaid balance at the rate
of 5.3 percent
per year; and contingent consideration ranging from 3.0 percent
to 4.0 percent
of related gross revenues over a five-year period. In June 2005,
the Company was
advised that the OM Purchaser had settled an action brought by
the former
employer of certain of OM Purchaser’s owners and employees alleging violation of
non-competition agreements. The settlement reportedly involved
a cash payment
and an agreement not to sell certain products for a period of one
year. Based on
an analysis of the facts and circumstances that existed at year-end,
and
considering the guidance from Topic 5U of the SEC Rules and Regulations,
“Gain
Recognition on the Sale of a Business or Operating Assets to a
Highly Leveraged
Entity,” the gain is being recognized as cash is collected (as collection
was
not reasonably assured). The Company realized a pre-tax gain on
the sale of $295
during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005. As of December 31,
2005, all
payments have been received and $854 of the promissory note remained
outstanding; however, OM Purchaser failed to make any subsequent,
required
payments under the note receivable. The Company is currently considering
its
collection options.
F-24
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
The
assets and liabilities of the discontinued operations are presented
separately
under the captions “Assets Held for Sale” and “Liabilities Associated with
Assets Held for Sale,” respectively, in the accompanying balance sheet as of
June 30, 2004 and consist of the following:
As
of June 30,
|
||||
2004
|
||||
Assets
held for sale
|
||||
Accounts
receivable
|
$
|
1,012
|
||
Due
to parent
|
(200
|
)
|
||
Inventory
|
226
|
|||
Accrued
taxes
|
79
|
|||
Prepaid
expenses
|
12
|
|||
Property
and equipment, net
|
50
|
|||
Total
assets held for sale
|
$
|
1,179
|
||
Liabilities
associated with assets held for sale
|
||||
Accounts
payable
|
$
|
304
|
||
Accrued
compensation
|
59
|
|||
Billing
in excess of cost
|
375
|
|||
Total
liabilities associated with assets held for sale
|
$
|
738
|
Summary
operating results of the discontinued operations are as follows:
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Revenue
- business services
|
$
|
3,805
|
$
|
5,928
|
$
|
6,111
|
||||
Cost
of goods sold - business services
|
3,038
|
4,052
|
4,055
|
|||||||
Gross
profit
|
767
|
1,876
|
2,056
|
|||||||
Marketing
and selling expenses
|
289
|
390
|
412
|
|||||||
General
and administrative expenses
|
253
|
1,113
|
1,270
|
|||||||
Impairment
losses
|
-
|
-
|
8,426
|
|||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes
|
225
|
373
|
(8,052
|
)
|
||||||
Gain
on disposal of discontinued operations
|
295
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
(Provision)
benefit for income taxes
|
(119
|
)
|
(156
|
)
|
(30
|
)
|
||||
Income
(loss) from discontinued operations, net of income taxes
|
$
|
401
|
$
|
217
|
$
|
(8,082
|
)
|
5. |
Sale
of Assets
|
Burk
Technology, Inc.
On
April
12, 2001, the Company sold the assets of the remote control portion
of the
RFM/Broadcast division to Burk Technology, Inc. (“Burk”), a privately held
developer and manufacturer of broadcast facility control systems
products. The
Company retained the accounts payable of the remote control portion
of the
RFM/Broadcast division. Burk assumed obligations for unfilled customer
orders
and satisfying warranty obligations to existing customers and for
inventory sold
to Burk. However, the Company retained certain warranty obligations
to Burk to
ensure that all of the assets sold to Burk were in good operating
condition and
repair.
F-25
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Consideration
for the sale consisted of $750 in cash at closing, $1,750 in the
form of a
seven-year promissory note, with interest at the rate of nine percent
per year,
and up to $700 as a commission over a period of up to seven years.
The payments
on the promissory note could be deferred based upon Burk not meeting
net
quarterly sales levels established within the agreement. The promissory
note was
secured by a subordinate security interest in the personal property
of Burk.
Based on an analysis of the facts and circumstances that existed
on April 12,
2001, and considering the guidance from Topic 5U of the SEC Rules
and
Regulations, “Gain Recognition on the Sale of a Business or Operating Assets
to
a Highly Leveraged Entity,” the gain is being recognized as cash is collected
(as collection was not reasonably assured and the Company had contingent
liabilities to Burk at closing). The commission was based upon
future net sales
of Burk over base sales established within the agreement. The Company
realized a
gain on the sale of $144 (net of applicable income taxes of $43),
$58 (net of
applicable income taxes of $35), and $200 (net of applicable income
taxes of
$118) for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003,
respectively. As
of June 30, 2005, $1,465 of the promissory note remained outstanding and
the Company had received $20 in commissions.
On
August
22, 2005, the Company entered into a Mutual Release and Waiver
Agreement with
Burk pursuant to which Burk paid the Company $1,346 in full satisfaction
of the
promissory note, which included a discount of $119. As part of
the Mutual
Release and Waiver Agreement, the Company waived any right to future
commission
payments from Burk. Additionally, Burk and the Company granted
mutual releases
to one another with respect to future claims and liabilities. Accordingly,
the
total pre-tax gain on the disposal of discontinued operations,
related to Burk,
was approximately $2,419.
6. |
Sale
of Broadcast Telephone
Interface
|
On
August
23, 2002, the Company entered into an agreement with Comrex Corporation
(“Comrex”). In exchange for $1,300, Comrex received certain inventory associated
with the broadcast telephone interface product line, a perpetual
software
license to use the Company’s technology related to broadcast telephone interface
products along with one free year of maintenance and support, and
transition
services for 90 days following the effective date of the agreement.
The
transition services included training, engineering assistance,
consultation, and
development services.
The
software license included in the arrangement is more than incidental
to the
products and services as a whole. All products and services are
considered
software and software-related. Consequently, the agreement has
been accounted
for pursuant to Statement of Position 97-2, “Software Revenue Recognition,”
(“SOP 97-2”). As the software is essential to the functionality of other
elements in the agreement and there is not vendor specific objective
evidence
for the fair value of the maintenance and support, the Company
recognized the
software license revenue, products, and services over time as services
are
performed, using the percentage-of-completion method of accounting
based on a
zero estimate of profit.
As
this
is the first time the Company has licensed software in this manner,
it was
impractical to estimate the final outcome of the agreement except
to assure that
no loss will be incurred. Consequently, the Company recognized
revenue equal to
cost until maintenance and support was the only undelivered element
of the
agreement. Once maintenance and support was the only undelivered
element of the
agreement, the remaining revenue was recognized ratably over the
remaining
maintenance and support period in accordance with SOP 97-2. The
Company
recognized $0, $130 and $1,054 in revenue related to this transaction
in the
fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.
The revenue is
included in business services revenue in the accompanying consolidated
financial
statements.
The
Company entered into a manufacturing agreement to continue to manufacture
additional product for Comrex until August 2003 on a when-and-if
needed basis.
Comrex paid the Company for any additional product on a per item
basis of cost
plus 30 percent. Given the future revenue stream associated with
each unit
produced, revenue will be recognized when-and-if received. During
the fiscal
years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, the Company has recognized
$0, $387
and $783, respectively, in revenue related to the manufacture of
additional
product from Comrex.
F-26
7. |
Inventories
|
Inventories,
net of reserves, consist of the following as of June 30, 2005 and
2004:
As
of June 30,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Raw
materials
|
$
|
1,804
|
$
|
1,674
|
|||
Finished
goods
|
1,705
|
2,016
|
|||||
Consigned
inventory
|
2,297
|
2,381
|
|||||
Total
inventory
|
$
|
5,806
|
$
|
6,071
|
Consigned
inventory represents inventory at distributors and other customers
where revenue
recognition criteria have not been achieved.
8. |
Property
and Equipment
|
Major
classifications of property and equipment and estimated useful
lives are as
follows as of June 30, 2005 and 2004:
Estimated
|
As
of June 30,
|
|||||||||
useful
lives
|
2005
|
2004
|
||||||||
Office
furniture and equipment
|
3
to 10 years
|
$
|
7,522
|
$
|
7,252
|
|||||
Leasehold
improvements
|
2
to 5 years
|
924
|
758
|
|||||||
Manufacturing
and test equipment
|
2
to 10 years
|
1,049
|
2,532
|
|||||||
Vehicles
|
3
to 5 years
|
-
|
9
|
|||||||
9,495
|
10,551
|
|||||||||
Accumulated
depreciation and amortization
|
(6,690
|
)
|
(6,524
|
)
|
||||||
Property
and equipment, net
|
$
|
2,805
|
$
|
4,027
|
9. |
Goodwill
and Other Intangible
Assets
|
The
Company had goodwill and definite-lived intangible assets related
to the
acquisition of E.mergent in 2002 and the acquisition of OM Video
in 2003.
F-27
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Goodwill
The
Company did not have any goodwill as of June 30, 2005, 2004, or
2003. The
following presents details of the Company’s goodwill by operating segments for
the year ended June 30, 2003:
Products
|
Business
Services (see Note 4)
|
Total
|
||||||||
Balances
as of June 30, 2002
|
$
|
5,026
|
$
|
12,046
|
$
|
17,072
|
||||
E.mergent
goodwill purchase price adjustment
|
-
|
20
|
20
|
|||||||
Acquisition
of OM Video
|
-
|
6,725
|
6,725
|
|||||||
Foreign
currency translation related to OM Video
|
||||||||||
goodwill
|
-
|
1,049
|
1,049
|
|||||||
Impairment
of E.mergent and OM Video goodwill
|
||||||||||
(see
Note 10)
|
(5,026
|
)
|
(19,840
|
)
|
(24,866
|
)
|
||||
Balances
as of June 30, 2003
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
Acquired
Intangibles
Amortization
of intangible assets was $184, $115, and $680 for the years ended
June 30, 2005,
2004, and 2003, respectively. Amortization of costs related to
patents was
reported in product cost of goods sold. Amortization of costs related
to
non-compete agreements was reported in marketing and selling expense.
The
following table presents the Company’s intangible assets as of June 30, 2005 and
2004:
As
of June 30,
|
||||||||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
|||||||||||||||
Gross
|
Accumulated
|
Gross
|
Accumulated
|
|||||||||||||
Useful
Lives
|
Value
|
Amortization
|
Value
|
Amortization
|
||||||||||||
Patents
|
15/5
years
|
$
|
1,060
|
$
|
(738
|
)
|
$
|
1,060
|
$
|
(175
|
)
|
|||||
Non-compete
agreements
|
2
to 3 years
|
-
|
-
|
52
|
(36
|
)
|
||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
1,060
|
$
|
(738
|
)
|
$
|
1,112
|
$
|
(211
|
)
|
During
June 2004, the Company decided to no longer invest additional research
and
development related to the camera products. A change was made to
the estimated
useful life of the camera-related patent from fifteen years to
five years.
Estimated future amortization expense is as follows:
Years
Ending
|
||||
June
30,
|
||||
2006
|
$
|
168
|
||
2007
|
154
|
|||
Thereafter
|
-
|
|||
Total
estimated amortization expense
|
$
|
322
|
F-28
10. |
Impairments
|
The
Company entered into the conferencing furniture manufacturing business
through
the E.mergent acquisition. The estimated fair value of the reporting
unit, for
purposes of evaluating goodwill for impairment, was less than its
carrying
values. Additionally, the estimated undiscounted future cash flows
generated by
certain other long-lived assets, excluding goodwill, was less than
its carrying
value. The impairment analysis performed in accordance with SFAS
No. 142 and
SFAS No. 144, resulted in an impairment loss of $5,102 for the
fiscal year ended
June 30, 2003. Management estimated the fair value of reporting
unit using
third-party appraisals. Management estimated the fair market value
of the
long-lived assets, excluding goodwill, using the present value
of expected
future discounted cash flows.
The
Company entered into the audiovisual integration services through
the E.mergent
and OM Video acquisitions. At the time of the acquisitions, management
believed
that the audiovisual integration services would complement existing
core
competencies and allow the Company to acquire market share in this
market
segment. However, the Company’s entry into the audiovisual integration services
business was perceived as a threat by its systems integrators and
value-added
resellers, since the Company began competing against many of them
for sales.
During the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003,
the Company
decided to stop pursuing new U.S. business service contracts and
to de-emphasize
the audiovisual integration market serving the Ottawa, Canada region.
These
changes in facts and circumstances as well as the change in the
Company’s
business environment constituted a triggering event requiring an
impairment
analysis to be performed in accordance with SFAS No. 142 and SFAS
No. 144. The
estimated fair value of the reporting units, for purposes of evaluating
goodwill
for impairment, was less than their carrying values. Additionally,
the estimated
undiscounted future cash flows generated by certain other long-lived
assets,
excluding goodwill, was less than their carrying values. The impairment
analyses
performed in accordance with SFAS No. 142 and SFAS No. 144, resulted
in an
impairment loss of $20,899 for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003.
Management
estimated the fair value of reporting units using third-party appraisals.
Management estimated the fair market value of the long-lived assets,
excluding
goodwill, using the present value of expected future discounted
cash flows.
The
impairment losses relate to the following:
Year
Ended
|
||||
June
30, 2003
|
||||
Goodwill:
|
||||
E.mergent - Products
|
$
|
5,026
|
||
E.mergent - Business Services (see Note 4)
|
12,066
|
|||
OM Video (see Note 4)
|
7,774
|
|||
24,866
|
||||
Intangible
assets:
|
||||
E.mergent - Products
|
18
|
|||
E.mergent - Business Services (see Note 4)
|
195
|
|||
OM Video (see Note 4)
|
387
|
|||
600
|
||||
Property
and equipment:
|
||||
E.mergent - Products
|
58
|
|||
E.mergent - Business Services (see Note 4)
|
212
|
|||
OM Video (see Note 4)
|
265
|
|||
535
|
||||
Total
|
$
|
26,001
|
F-29
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
During
fiscal 2003, the Company recorded impairment losses of $270 and
$265 related to
property and equipment associated with the E.mergent and the OM
Video asset
groupings, respectively.
Approximately
$12,473 of the E.mergent impairment charges are included in discontinued
operations and are related to the U.S. audiovisual integration
services business
in fiscal 2003 (see Note 4). Impairment charges of $8,426 related
to OM Video
are included in discontinued operations in fiscal 2003 (see Note
4). An
additional $5,102 of the E.mergent conferencing furniture manufacturing-related
impairment charges are included in impairment losses in fiscal
2003.
As
of
June 30, 2005, the Company utilized $697 in net operating loss
(“NOL”) and $159
in research credits carryovers that the Company acquired when it
purchased
E.mergent. These carryovers were subject to a full valuation allowance
at the
time of acquisition and accordingly increased the goodwill associated
with the
acquisition. This goodwill was fully impaired during the year ended
June 30,
2003. In accordance with SFAS No. 109, the Company reduced the
carrying value of
the remaining long-lived asset from the E.mergent acquisition by
$395.
As
of
June 30, 2005 and in connection with the Company’s outsourcing of its Salt Lake
City manufacturing operations to TPM, the Company impaired $180
of property and
equipment that TPM did not purchase and that the Company did not
believe was
likely to be sold. (see Note 26).
11. |
Lines
of Credit
|
Through
December 22, 2003, the Company maintained a revolving line of credit
in the
amount of $10,000 with a commercial bank. Prior to November 22,
2002, the line
of credit was in the amount of $5,000. The line of credit was secured
by the
Company’s accounts receivable and inventory. The interest rate on the line
of
credit was a variable interest rate (250 basis points over the
London Interbank
Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) or prime less 0.3 percent, at the Company’s option). The
borrowing rate was 3.6 percent as of December 22, 2003, when the
line of credit
expired. The weighted average interest rate for fiscal 2004 through
December 22,
2003 and for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003, were 3.6 percent
and 4.0
percent, respectively. The terms of the line of credit prohibited
the payment of
dividends and required the Company to maintain other defined financial
ratios
and restrictive covenants. The Company was not in compliance with
the debt
coverage ratio as of June 30, 2003, however the Company obtained
a waiver from
the lender under the revolving credit facility. No compensating
balance
arrangements were required.
On
May
16, 2003, the bank froze the line of credit as the Company had
not provided the
bank with financial statements for the quarter ended December 31,
2002. The line
of credit expired on December 22, 2003 and was not renewed.
12. |
Leases
|
The
Company has capital leases with finance companies which facilitated
the purchase
of equipment. Additionally, the Company has noncancelable operating
leases
related to facilities and vehicles.
Property
and equipment under capital leases are as follows:
As
of June 30,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Office
furniture and equipment
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
28
|
|||
Accumulated
amortization
|
-
|
(15
|
)
|
||||
Net
property and equipment under capital leases
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
13
|
The
Company prepaid the remaining $8 balance of the capital lease in
October 2004.
Depreciation expense for assets recorded under capital leases was
$2, $5, $5 for
the years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.
F-30
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
On
August
1, 2005, the Company entered into a one-year sublease with TPM
with respect to
the 12,000 square foot manufacturing facility in its headquarters
building in
connection with the outsourcing of its manufacturing operations.
Either party
may terminate the lease for any reason upon 90 days written notice
or 60 days
written notice to the other party of material breach of the agreement.
The
subtenant pays $11 per month and the sublease expires on July 31,
2006. On March
2, 2006, the subtenant provided the Company with written notice
of its intent to
terminate the lease on May 31, 2006.
Certain
operating leases contain rent escalation clauses based on the consumer
price
index. Rental expense is recognized on a straight-line basis. Rental
expense,
which was composed of minimum payments under operating lease obligations,
was
$607, $1,786, and $1,327 for the years ended June 30, 2005, 2004,
and 2003,
respectively.
Future
minimum lease payments under capital leases and noncancelable operating
leases
with initial terms of one year or more are as follows as of June
30,
2005:
Gross
Operating Leases
|
Less
Sublease
|
Net
Operating Leases
|
||||||||
For
years ending June 30:
|
||||||||||
2006
|
$
|
494
|
$
|
(110
|
)
|
$
|
384
|
|||
2007
|
219
|
-
|
219
|
|||||||
2008
|
21
|
-
|
21
|
|||||||
2009
and thereafter
|
2
|
-
|
2
|
|||||||
Total
minimum lease payments
|
$
|
736
|
$
|
(110
|
)
|
$
|
626
|
13. |
Note
Payable
|
On
October 14, 2002, the Company entered into a note payable in the
amount of
$2,000. The note payable encompassed previous expenditures related
to our Oracle
Enterprise Resource Planning implementation. The term of the note
was 36 months
with monthly payments of $60 and an interest rate of 5.8 percent.
The Company
pre-paid the remaining $769 balance of the note payable in October
2004.
14. |
Accrued
Liabilities
|
Accrued
liabilities consist of the following as of June 30, 2005 and 2004:
As
of June 30,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Accrued
salaries and other compensation
|
$
|
977
|
$
|
889
|
|||
Other
accrued liabilities
|
1,049
|
803
|
|||||
Class
action settlement
|
3,596
|
9,013
|
|||||
Total
|
$
|
5,622
|
$
|
10,705
|
15. |
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
The
Company establishes contingent liabilities when a particular contingency
is both
probable and estimable. For the contingencies noted below the Company
has
accrued amounts considered probable and estimable. The Company
is not aware of
pending claims or assessments, other than as described below, which
may have a
material adverse impact on the Company’s financial position or results of
operations.
F-31
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Ascalade
Communications, Ltd.
On
August 11, 2003, the Company entered into a manufacturing agreement
with
Ascalade Communications, Ltd. related to the outsourced manufacturing
of certain
of its products. The manufacturing agreement established annual
volume
commitments. In the event annual volume commitments are not met,
the Company
will be subject to a tooling amortization charge for the difference
between the
Company’s volume commitment and its actual product purchases. For the calendar
year ended December 31, 2004, the Company did not meet its annual
volume
commitment and was required to pay $30 in amortization charges.
The Company was
also responsible for prepayment of $274 in certain raw material
inventory
related to the annual volume commitment. As of June 30, 2005, the
entire balance
of the prepayment remained outstanding.
Legal
Proceedings.
In
addition to the legal proceedings described below, the Company
is also involved
from time to time in various claims and other legal proceedings
which arise in
the normal course of business. Such matters are subject to many
uncertainties
and outcomes that are not predictable. However, based on the information
available to the Company as of February 28, 2006 and after discussions
with
legal counsel, the Company does not believe any such other proceedings
will have
a material, adverse effect on its business, results of operations,
financial
position, or liquidity, except as described below.
The
SEC Action.
On
January 15, 2003, the SEC filed a civil complaint against the Company;
Frances
Flood, then the Company’s Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and President; and
Susie Strohm, then the Company’s Chief Financial Officer. The complaint alleged
that from the quarter ended March 31, 2001, the defendants engaged
in a program
of inflating the Company’s revenues, net income, and accounts receivable by
engaging in improper revenue recognition in violation of generally
accepted
auditing standards (“GAAP”) and Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and
Sections 10(b), 13(a), and 13(b) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934 and
various regulations promulgated thereunder. Following the filing
of the
complaint, the Company placed Ms. Flood and Ms. Strohm on administrative
leave
and they subsequently resigned from their positions with the Company.
On
December 4, 2003, the Company settled the SEC action by entering
into a consent
decree in which, without admitting or denying the allegations of
the complaint,
it consented to the entry of a permanent injunction prohibiting
future
securities law violations. No fine or penalty was assessed against
the Company
as part of the settlement.
U.S.
Attorney’s Investigation. On
January 28, 2003, the Company was advised that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for
the District of Utah had begun an investigation stemming from the
complaint in
the SEC action described above. No pleadings have been filed to
date and the
Company intends on cooperating fully with the U.S. Attorney’s Office should any
developments occur in the future.
The
Whistleblower Action.
On
February 11, 2003, the Company’s former Vice President of Sales filed a
whistleblower claim with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
(“OSHA”) under the employee protection provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act
alleging that the Company had wrongfully terminated his employment
for reporting
the Company’s alleged improper revenue recognition practices to the SEC in
December 2002, which precipitated the SEC action against the Company.
In
February 2004, OSHA issued a preliminary order in favor of the
former officer,
ordering that he be reinstated with back pay, lost benefits, and
attorney’s
fees. The former officer had also filed a separate lawsuit against
the Company
in the United States District Court for the District of Utah, Central
Division,
alleging various employment discrimination claims. In May 2004,
the
Administrative Law Judge approved a settlement agreement with the
former officer
pursuant to which he released the Company from all claims asserted
by him in the
OSHA proceeding and the federal court action in exchange for a
cash payment by
the Company. The settlement did not have a material impact on the
Company's
results of operations or financial condition.
F-32
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
The
Shareholders’ Class Action.
On
June 30, 2003, a consolidated complaint was filed against the Company,
eight present or former officers and directors of the Company,
and Ernst &
Young LLP (“Ernst & Young”), the Company’s former independent public
accountants, by a class consisting of purchasers of the Company’s common stock
during the period from April 17, 2001 through January 15, 2003.
The action
followed the consolidation of several previously filed class action
complaints
and the appointment of lead counsel for the class. The allegations
in the
complaint were essentially the same as those contained in the SEC
complaint
described above. On December 4, 2003, the Company, on behalf of
itself and all
other defendants with the exception of Ernst & Young, entered into a
settlement agreement with the class pursuant to which the Company
agreed to pay
the class $5,000 and to issue the class 1.2 million shares of its
common stock.
The cash payment was made in two equal installments, the first
on November 10,
2003 and the second on January 14, 2005. On May 23, 2005, the court
order was
amended to require the Company to pay cash in lieu of stock to
those members of
the class who would otherwise have been entitled to receive fewer
than 100
shares of stock. On September 29, 2005, the Company completed its
obligations
under the settlement agreement by issuing a total of 1,148,494
shares of the
Company’s common stock to the plaintiff class, including 228,000 shares
previously issued in November 2004, and the Company paid an aggregate
of $127 in
cash in lieu of shares to those members of the class who would
otherwise have
been entitled to receive an odd-lot number of shares or who resided
in states in
which there was no exemption available for the issuance of shares.
The cash
payments were calculated on the basis of $2.46 per share which
was equal to the
higher of (i) the closing price for the Company’s common stock as reported by
the Pink Sheets on the business day prior to the date the shares
were mailed, or
(ii) the average closing price over the five trading days prior
to such mailing
date.
On
a
quarterly basis, the Company revalues the un-issued shares to the
closing price
of the stock on the last day of the quarter. During fiscal 2005,
the Company
received a benefit of approximately $2,046 while during fiscal
2004 the Company
incurred an expense of approximately $4,080 related to the revaluation
of the
1.2 million shares of the Company’s common stock that were issued in November
2004 and September 2005.
The
Shareholder Derivative Actions.
Between
March and August 2003, four shareholder derivative actions were filed by
certain shareholders of the Company against various present and
past officers
and directors of the Company and against Ernst & Young. The complaints
asserted allegations similar to those asserted in the SEC complaint
and
shareholders’ class action described above and also alleged that the defendant
directors and officers violated their fiduciary duties to the Company
by causing
or allowing the Company to recognize revenue in violation of GAAP
and to issue
materially misstated financial statements and that Ernst & Young breached
its professional responsibilities to the Company and acted in violation
of GAAP
by failing to identify or prevent the alleged revenue recognition
violations and
by issuing unqualified audit opinions with respect to the Company’s fiscal 2002
and 2001 financial statements. One of these actions was dismissed
without
prejudice on June 13, 2003. As to the other three actions, the Company’s
Board of Directors appointed a special litigation committee of
independent
directors to evaluate the claims. That committee determined that
the maintenance
of the derivative proceedings against the individual defendants
was not in the
best interest of the Company. Accordingly, on December 12, 2003,
the Company
moved to dismiss those claims. In March 2004, the Company’s motions were
granted, and the derivative claims were dismissed with prejudice
as to all
defendants except Ernst & Young. The Company was substituted as the
plaintiff in the action and is now pursuing in its own name the
claims against
Ernst & Young.
Employment
Separation Agreements.
On
December 5, 2003, the Company entered into employment separation
agreements with
Frances Flood, the Company’s former Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, and
President, and Susie Strohm, the Company’s former Chief Financial Officer, which
generally provided that these individuals would resign from their
positions and
employment with the Company, and the Company would make one-time,
lump-sum
payments in consideration of their surrender and delivery to the
Company of
shares of the Company’s common stock and Company stock options and their release
of claims against the Company. Ms. Flood and Ms. Strohm also agreed
to cooperate
with the Company in the SEC Action and related proceedings and
the Company
agreed to continue to indemnify such persons for attorneys fees
incurred in the
SEC Action and related proceedings, subject to the limitations
imposed by Utah
law. The Company also released any existing claims against such
persons except
such claims as to which indemnification would not be permitted
by Utah law. The
agreement with Ms. Flood provided for a payment to her of $350
and her surrender
and delivery to the Company of 35,000 shares of the Company’s common stock and
706,434 stock options (461,433 of which were vested). The agreement
with Ms.
Strohm provided for a payment to her of $75 and her surrender and
delivery to
the Company of 15,500 shares of the Company’s common stock and 268,464 stock
options (171,963 of which were vested) (see Note 20).
F-33
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Indemnification
of Officers and Directors.
The
Company’s by-laws and the Utah Revised Business Corporation Act provide
for
indemnification of directors and officers against reasonable expenses
incurred
by such persons in connection with civil or criminal actions or
proceedings to
which they have been made parties because they are or were directors
or officers
of the Company or its subsidiaries. Indemnification is permitted
if the person
satisfies the required standards of conduct. The litigation matters
described
above involved certain of the Company’s current and former directors and
officers, all of whom are covered by the aforementioned indemnity
and if
applicable, certain prior period insurance policies. The Company
has indemnified
such persons for legal expenses incurred by them in such actions
and, as
discussed below, has sought reimbursement from its insurance carriers.
However,
as also discussed below the Company cannot predict with certainty
the extent to
which the Company will recover the indemnification payments from
its insurers.
The
Insurance Coverage Action. On
February 9, 2004, the Company and Edward Dallin Bagley, the Chairman
of the
Board of Directors and a significant shareholder of the Company,
jointly filed
an action against National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania (“National Union”) and Lumbermens Mutual Insurance Company of
Berkeley Heights, New Jersey (“Lumbermens Mutual”), the carriers of certain
prior period directors and officers’ liability insurance policies, to recover
the costs of defending and resolving claims against certain of
the Company’s
present and former directors and officers in connection with the
SEC complaint,
the shareholders’ class action, and the shareholder derivative actions described
above, and seeking other damages resulting from the refusal of
such carriers to
timely pay the amounts owing under such liability insurance policies.
This
action has been consolidated into a declaratory relief action filed
by one of
the insurance carriers on February 6, 2004 against the Company
and certain of
its current and former directors. In this action, the insurers
assert that they
are entitled to rescind insurance coverage under our directors
and officers
liability insurance policies, $3,000 of which was provided by National
Union and
$2,000 of which was provided by Lumbermens Mutual, based on alleged
misstatements in the Company’s insurance applications. In February 2005, the
Company entered into a confidential settlement agreement with Lumbermens
Mutual
pursuant to which the Company and Mr. Bagley received a lump-sum
cash amount and
the plaintiffs agreed to dismiss their claims against Lumbermens
Mutual with
prejudice. The cash settlement is held in a segregated account
until the claims
involving National Union have been resolved, at which time the
amounts received
in the action will be allocated between the Company and Mr. Bagley.
The amount
distributed to the Company and Mr. Bagley will be determined based
on future
negotiations between the Company and Mr. Bagley. The Company cannot
currently
estimate the amount of the settlement which it will ultimately
receive. Upon
determining the amount of the settlement which the Company will
ultimately
receive, the Company will record this as a contingent gain. On
October 21, 2005,
the court granted summary judgment in favor of National Union on
its rescission
defense and accordingly entered a judgment dismissing all of the
claims asserted
by ClearOne and Mr. Bagley. In connection with the summary judgment,
the Company
has been ordered to pay approximately $59 in expenses. However,
due to the
Lumbermans Mutual cash proceeds discussed above and the appeal
to the summary
judgment discussed below, this potential liability has not been
recorded in the
balance sheet as of June 30, 2005. On February 2, 2006, the Company
and Mr.
Bagley filed an appeal to the summary judgment granted on October
21, 2005 and
intend to vigorously pursue the appeal and any follow-up proceedings
regarding
their claims against National Union, although no assurances can
be given that
they will be successful. The Company and Mr. Bagley have entered
into a Joint
Prosecution and Defense Agreement in connection with the action
and the Company
is paying all litigation expenses except litigation expenses which
are solely
related to Mr. Bagley’s claims in the litigation.
Wells
Submission.
The
Company had been advised by the staff of the Salt Lake District
Office of the
SEC that the staff intended to recommend to the Commission that
administrative
proceedings be instituted to revoke the registration of the Company’s common
stock based on the Company’s failure to timely file annual and quarterly reports
with the Commission. The Company provided the staff with a so-called
“Wells
Submission” setting forth its position with respect to the staff’s intended
recommendation. To date, the Commission has not instituted an administrative
proceeding against the Company; however, there can be no assurance
that the
Commission will not institute an administrative proceeding in the
future or that
the Company would prevail if an administrative proceeding were
instituted.
F-34
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
The
Pacific Technology & Telecommunications Collection Action.
On
August 12, 2003, the Company initiated a commercial arbitration proceeding
against Pacific Technology & Telecommunications (“PT&T”), a former
distributor, seeking to collect approximately $1,754 that PT&T owed the
Company for inventory it purchased and received but did not pay
for. PT&T
denied the Company’s claim and asserted counterclaims. Subsequently, on
April 20, 2004, PT&T filed for protection under Chapter 7 of the United
States Bankruptcy Code, which had the effect of staying the proceeding.
Following PT&T’s bankruptcy filing, the Company successfully negotiated a
settlement with the bankruptcy trustee. Under the settlement, which
has been
approved by the bankruptcy court, the Company paid $25 and obtained
the right to
recover all unsold ClearOne inventory held by PT&T and the right to pursue
on the basis of an assignment any claims that PT&T may have against any of
its own officers or directors, subject, however, to a maximum recovery
of $800.
The Company is currently in the process of investigating whether
any such claims
exist and, if so, whether it would be in the Company’s best interest to pursue
them given the anticipated legal expenses and the uncertainties
of being able to
collect any resulting favorable judgment. The settlement also resulted
in the
release and dismissal with prejudice of all of PT&T’s claims against the
Company. To date, the Company has not recovered any inventory held
by PT&T.
16. |
Shareholders’
Equity
|
Private
Placement
On
December 11, 2001, the Company closed a private placement of 1,500,000
shares of
common stock. Gross proceeds from the private placement were $25,500,
before
costs and expenses associated with this transaction, which totaled
$1,665.
The
Company also issued warrants to purchase 150,000 shares of its
common stock at
$17.00 per share to its financial advisor. Such warrants vested
immediately and
were valued at $1,556 using the Black-Scholes option pricing model
with the
following assumptions: expected dividend yield of 0 percent, risk-free
interest
rate of 4.4 percent, expected price volatility of 68.0 percent,
and contractual
life of five years. The warrants expire on November 27, 2006. All
warrants were
outstanding as of June 30, 2005.
Stock
Repurchase Program
During
October 2002, the Company’s Board of Directors approved a stock repurchase
program to purchase up to 1,000,000 shares of the Company’s common stock over
the following 12 months on the open market or in private transactions.
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003, the Company repurchased 125,000
shares on
the open market for $430. All repurchased shares were immediately
retired. The
stock repurchase program expired in October 2003 and no additional
shares were
repurchased.
17. |
Stock
Options
|
The
Company’s 1990 Incentive Plan (the “1990 Plan”) has shares of common stock
available for issuance to employees and directors. Provisions of
the 1990 Plan
include the granting of stock options. Generally, stock options
vest over a
five-year period at 10 percent, 15 percent, 20 percent, 25 percent,
and 30
percent per year. Certain other stock options vest in full after
eight years. As
of June 30, 2005, there were 30,750 options outstanding under the
1990 Plan and
no additional options were available for grant under such plan.
The
Company also has a 1998 Stock Option Plan (the “1998 Plan”). Provisions of the
1998 Plan include the granting of stock options. Of the options
granted through
December 1999, 1,066,000 will cliff vest after 9.75 years; however,
such vesting
was accelerated for 637,089 of these options upon meeting certain
earnings per
share goals through the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003. Of the
options granted
subsequent to December 1999 through June 2002, 1,248,250 will cliff
vest after
six years; however, such vesting was accelerated for 300,494 of
these options
upon meeting certain earnings per share goals through the fiscal
year ended June
30, 2005. Under the 1998 Plan, 2,500,000 shares were authorized
for grant. The
1998 Plan expires June 10, 2008, or when all the shares available
under the plan
have been issued if this occurs earlier. As of June 30, 2005, there
were
1,462,362 options outstanding under the 1998 Plan and 735,514 options
available
for grant in the future.
F-35
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Stock
option information for the fiscal years ending June 30, 2005, 2004,
and 2003
with respect to the Company’s stock option plans is as follows:
Stock
Options
|
Number
of Shares
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
|||||
Outstanding
at June 30, 2002
|
1,518,956
|
$
|
8.71
|
||||
Granted
|
835,500
|
3.57
|
|||||
Expired
and canceled
|
(350,200
|
)
|
11.57
|
||||
Exercised
|
(31,500
|
)
|
2.72
|
||||
Outstanding
at June 30, 2003
|
1,972,756
|
6.12
|
|||||
Granted
|
1,118,250
|
4.37
|
|||||
Expired
and canceled
|
(1,657,819
|
)
|
4.72
|
||||
Exercised
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Outstanding
at June 30, 2004
|
1,433,187
|
6.37
|
|||||
Granted
|
450,500
|
4.77
|
|||||
Expired
and canceled
|
(390,575
|
)
|
5.17
|
||||
Exercised
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Outstanding
at June 30, 2005
|
1,493,112
|
$
|
6.21
|
The
following table summarizes information about stock options outstanding
as of
June 30, 2005:
Options
Outstanding
|
Options
Exercisable
|
|||||||||||||||
Exercise
Price Range
|
Options
Outstanding
|
Weighted
Average Contractual Remaining Life
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
Options
Exercisable
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
|||||||||||
$0.00
to $2.04
|
30,750
|
0.5
years
|
$
|
0.75
|
30,750
|
$
|
0.75
|
|||||||||
$2.05
to $4.09
|
658,424
|
8.1
years
|
3.36
|
405,745
|
3.36
|
|||||||||||
$4.10
to $6.13
|
250,000
|
9.1
years
|
5.23
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
$6.13
to $8.18
|
244,976
|
8.7
years
|
6.43
|
105,467
|
6.44
|
|||||||||||
$8.19
to $10.22
|
13,581
|
4.4
years
|
9.67
|
11,144
|
9.67
|
|||||||||||
$10.23
to $12.26
|
76,360
|
5.4
years
|
11.39
|
26,860
|
11.39
|
|||||||||||
$12.27
to $14.31
|
126,946
|
5.0
years
|
13.30
|
78,714
|
13.58
|
|||||||||||
$14.32
to $16.35
|
64,640
|
4.9
years
|
15.25
|
26,689
|
15.25
|
|||||||||||
$16.36
to $18.40
|
26,935
|
5.0
years
|
17.15
|
5,005
|
17.15
|
|||||||||||
$18.41
to $20.45
|
500
|
4.7
years
|
19.63
|
338
|
19.63
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
1,493,112
|
7.6
years
|
$
|
6.21
|
690,712
|
$
|
5.86
|
The
following are the options exercisable at the corresponding weighted
average
exercise price as of June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively:
690,712 at
$5.86; 469,810 at $6.43; and 839,871 at $4.80.
F-36
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
The
grant
date weighted average fair value of options granted during the
years ended June
30, 2005, 2004, and 2003 was $3.63, $3.29, and $2.50, respectively.
The fair
value of options was determined using the Black-Scholes option
pricing model
with the following weighted average assumptions for the fiscal
years ended June
30, 2005, 2004, and 2003: expected dividend yield, 0 percent for
each year;
risk-free interest rate was 4.0 percent, 3.2 percent, and 2.5 percent,
respectively; expected price volatility, 91.8 percent, 91.2 percent,
and 90.0
percent; and expected life of options, 5.8, 5.2, and 4.9 years.
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2001, the Company modified 25,000
options to
reduce the exercise price of the award. The award is being accounted
for as
variable and the intrinsic value of the award is remeasured until
the date the
award is exercised, is forfeited, or expires unexercised. Compensation
cost with
respect to a variable award is being recognized on an accelerated
basis in
accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation
No. 28,
“Accounting for Stock Appreciation Rights and Other Variable Stock
Option or
Award Plans.”
Due
to
the Company’s failure to remain current in its filing of periodic reports with
the SEC, employees, executive officers, and directors are currently
not allowed
to exercise options under either the 1990 Plan or the 1998 Plan.
Since December
2003, individual grants that had been affected by this situation
were modified
to extend the life of the option through the date the Company becomes
current in
its filings with the SEC and options again become exercisable.
These
modifications include (i) the extension of the post-service exercise
period of
vested options held by persons who have ceased to serve the Company;
(ii) the
extension of the option exercise period for maturing options that
were fully
vested and unexercised; (iii) the acceleration of vesting schedule
for certain
key employees whose employment terminated due to the sale of the
conferencing
services business to Premiere; and (iv) the acceleration of vesting
schedule of
one former officer at termination. The Company booked compensation
expense of
$41 and $200 during fiscal 2005 and fiscal 2004, respectively,
due to these
modifications.
18. |
Employee
Stock Purchase Plan
|
The
Company has an Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”). A total of 500,000 shares
of common stock were reserved for issuance under the ESPP. The
Company’s Board
of Directors or a committee established by the Board of Directors
administers
the ESPP and has authority to interpret the terms of the ESPP and
to determine
eligibility. The ESPP is intended to qualify under Section 423
of the Internal
Revenue Code. All employees are eligible after thirty days
employment.
Employees
can purchase common stock through payroll deductions of up to 10
percent of
their base pay. Amounts deducted and accumulated by the employees
are used to
purchase shares of common stock on the last day of each month.
The Company
directs a participating broker to conduct open market purchases
of the common
stock and the purchase price is the price of the employee’s shares. The Company
contributes to the account of the employee one share of common
stock for every
nine shares purchased by the employee under the ESPP. An employee
may end
participation at any time. Participation in the ESPP ends upon
termination of
employment. The program was suspended during fiscal 2003 due to
the Company’s
failure to remain current in its filing of periodic reports with
the SEC. During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003, 1,841 shares of common stock
were issued
under the ESPP. The ESPP is compensatory under APB Opinion No.
25, “Accounting
for Stock Issued to Employees” (“APB 25”). Compensation expense from the ESPP
was $8 for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003.
F-37
19. |
Significant
Customers
|
During
the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, revenues
in the Company’s
product segment included sales to three different distributors
that represented
more than 10 percent each. The following table summarizes the percentage
of
total revenue for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and
2003:
Product
Segment Revenues
|
|||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
|
Customer
A
|
28.0%
|
27.4%
|
17.5%
|
Customer
B
|
19.2%
|
18.3%
|
12.7%
|
Customer
C
|
16.0%
|
18.6%
|
11.3%
|
Total
|
63.2%
|
64.3%
|
41.5%
|
The
following table summarizes the percentage of total gross accounts
receivable for
the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005 and 2004:
Gross
Accounts Receivable
|
||
2005
|
2004
|
|
Customer
A
|
29.4%
|
23.3%
|
Customer
B
|
18.7%
|
17.2%
|
Customer
C
|
13.9%
|
22.8%
|
Total
|
62.0%
|
63.3%
|
These
distributors facilitate product sales to a large number of end-users,
none of
which is known to account for more than 10 percent of the Company’s revenue from
product sales. Nevertheless, the loss of one or more distributors
could reduce
revenues and have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business and
results of operations.
20. |
Severance
Charges
|
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003, the Company recorded a total
of $362 in
severance and other related costs associated with a reduction of
43 employees in
the United States and Ireland. Such costs were included in operating
expenses
during the year ended June 30, 2003. The Company paid out this
entire amount
during the year ended June 30, 2003.
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004, the Company recorded a total
of $182 in
severance associated with settlement agreements and releases with
three former
executive officers in connection with the cessation of their employment.
Such
costs were included in operating expenses during the year ended
June 30, 2004.
The Company paid these amounts during the years ended June 30,
2004 and 2005.
Additionally and in connection with the employment separation agreements
between
the Company and Ms. Flood and the Company and Ms. Strohm, the Company
recorded
compensation expense of $306 and $56, respectively (see Note 15).
During
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, the Company recorded a total
of $100 in
severance associated with the severance agreement with one of the
Company’s
former Vice-Presidents, on July 15, 2004 and a total of $175 in
severance
associated with the closing of the Germany office. Such costs were
included in
operating expenses during the year ended June 30, 2005.
F-38
21. |
Retirement
Savings and Profit Sharing Plan
|
The
Company has a 401(k) retirement savings and profit sharing plan
to which it
makes discretionary matching contributions, as authorized by the
Board of
Directors. All full-time employees who are at least 21 years of
age and have a
minimum of sixty days of service with the Company are eligible
to participate in
the plan. Matching contributions are 20 percent up to 6 percent
of the
employee’s earnings, paid bi-weekly; however, prior to the fiscal year ended
June 30, 2003, the Company paid matching contributions at fiscal
year-end. The
Company’s retirement plan contribution expense for the fiscal years ended
June
30, 2005, 2004, and 2003 totaled $53, $30, and $0, respectively.
22. |
Income
Taxes
|
Loss
from
continuing operations before income taxes consisted of the
following:
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
U.S.
|
$
|
(1,148
|
)
|
$
|
(12,438
|
)
|
$
|
(17,823
|
)
|
|
Non-U.S.
|
52
|
183
|
(371
|
)
|
||||||
$
|
(1,096
|
)
|
$
|
(12,255
|
)
|
$
|
(18,194
|
)
|
The
benefit (provision) for income taxes on income from continuing
operations
consisted of the following:
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Current:
|
||||||||||
U.S.
Federal
|
$
|
2,845
|
$
|
3,698
|
$
|
3,461
|
||||
U.S.
State
|
423
|
163
|
131
|
|||||||
Non-U.S.
|
(20
|
)
|
(46
|
)
|
(16
|
)
|
||||
Total
current
|
$
|
3,248
|
$
|
3,815
|
$
|
3,576
|
||||
Deferred:
|
||||||||||
U.S.
Federal
|
(2,236
|
)
|
666
|
771
|
||||||
U.S.
State
|
(337
|
)
|
440
|
613
|
||||||
Non-U.S.
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Change
in deferred before valuation allowance
|
(2,573
|
)
|
1,106
|
1,384
|
||||||
Decrease
(increase) in valuation allowance
|
2,573
|
(4,185
|
)
|
(3,608
|
)
|
|||||
Total
deferred
|
-
|
(3,079
|
)
|
(2,224
|
)
|
|||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
$
|
3,248
|
$
|
736
|
$
|
1,352
|
F-39
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
The
following table presents the principal reasons for the difference
between the
actual effective income tax rate and the expected U.S. federal
statutory income
tax rate of 34.0 percent on income from continuing operations:
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
U.S.
federal statutory income tax rate at 34.0 percent
|
$
|
373
|
$
|
4,167
|
$
|
6,186
|
||||
State
income tax (provision) benefit, net of federal income
|
||||||||||
tax
effect
|
(3
|
)
|
75
|
53
|
||||||
Research
and development credit
|
188
|
108
|
-
|
|||||||
Foreign
earnings or losses taxed at different rates
|
(3
|
)
|
(10
|
)
|
(255
|
)
|
||||
Impairment
of E.mergent goodwill
|
-
|
-
|
(1,709
|
)
|
||||||
Change
in valuation allowance
|
2,573
|
(4,185
|
)
|
(3,608
|
)
|
|||||
Valuation
allowance change attributable to state tax impact
|
||||||||||
and
other
|
-
|
436
|
661
|
|||||||
Non-deductible
items and other
|
120
|
145
|
24
|
|||||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
$
|
3,248
|
$
|
736
|
$
|
1,352
|
Deferred
income taxes are determined based on the differences between the
financial
reporting and income tax bases of assets and liabilities using
enacted income
tax rates expected to apply when the differences are expected to
be settled or
realized. As of June 30, 2005 and 2004, significant components
of the net U.S.
deferred income tax assets and liabilities were as follows:
As
of June 30,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Deferred
income tax assets:
|
|||||||
Net
operating loss carryforwards
|
$
|
786
|
$
|
1,838
|
|||
Accrued
liabilities
|
1,649
|
3,865
|
|||||
Allowance
for sales returns and doubtful accounts
|
18
|
9
|
|||||
Inventory
reserve
|
757
|
1,019
|
|||||
Deferred
revenue
|
1,086
|
1,455
|
|||||
Installment
sale of discontinued operations
|
172
|
178
|
|||||
Accumulated
research and development credits
|
333
|
382
|
|||||
Alternative
minimum tax credits
|
355
|
355
|
|||||
Basis
difference in intangible assets
|
922
|
797
|
|||||
Other
|
266
|
227
|
|||||
Subtotal
|
6,344
|
10,125
|
|||||
Valuation
allowance
|
(5,909
|
)
|
(9,507
|
)
|
|||
Deferred
income tax assets
|
435
|
618
|
|||||
Deferred
income tax liabilities:
|
|||||||
Difference
in property and equipment basis
|
(435
|
)
|
(618
|
)
|
|||
Other
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Deferred
income tax liabilities
|
(435
|
)
|
(618
|
)
|
|||
Net
deferred income tax assets
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
F-40
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Deferred
income tax assets and liabilities were netted by income tax jurisdiction
and
were reported in the consolidated balance sheets as of June 30,
2005 and 2004,
as follows:
As
of June 30,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Current
deferred income tax assets
|
$
|
270
|
$
|
401
|
|||
Long-term
deferred income tax assets
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Current
deferred income tax liabilities
|
-
|
-
|
|||||
Long-term
deferred income tax liabilities
|
(270
|
)
|
(401
|
)
|
|||
Net
deferred income tax assets
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
The
Company has not provided for U.S. deferred income taxes or foreign
withholding
taxes on the undistributed earnings of its non-U.S. subsidiaries
since these
earnings are intended to be reinvested indefinitely and therefore,
the foreign
currency translation adjustment included in other comprehensive
income has not
been tax affected. It is not practical to estimate the amount of
additional
taxes that might be payable on such undistributed earnings. Total
undistributed
earnings from foreign subsidiaries were $367, $559, and $205 for
the fiscal
years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.
As
of
June 30, 2005, the Company had research credit and alternative
minimum tax
credit carryforwards for U.S. federal income tax reporting purposes
of $182 and
$355, respectively, which will begin to expire in 2025. As of June
30, 2005, the
Company utilized $697 in net operating loss (“NOL”) and $159 in research credits
carryforwards that the Company acquired when it purchased E.mergent.
These
carryforwards were subject to a full valuation allowance at the
time of
acquisition. Since these carryforwards were utilized in the current
year, the
Company credited the tax benefit for the utilization of these carryforwards
to
other intangible assets acquired in the E.mergent acquisition since
the goodwill
related to the E.mergent acquisition was fully impaired at June
30, 2003. On
June 30, 2005, the Company also had state NOL and research and
development tax
credit carryforwards of approximately $15,713 and $151, respectively,
which
expire depending on the rules of the various states to which the
carryovers
relate. The Company also has a NOL carryforward in its Irish subsidiary.
However, the Company is in the process of closing its Irish subsidiary
and does
not anticipate ever being able to use these losses and has not
separately
reported these amounts.
The
Internal Revenue Code contains provisions that reduce or limit
the availability
and utilization of NOL and credit carryforwards if certain changes
in ownership
have taken place. The Company has not determined if it has undergone
an
ownership change under these provisions. If the Company has undergone
an
ownership change under these rules, the Company’s ability to utilize its NOLs
and credit carryovers may be limited. However, as a result of an
ownership
change associated with the acquisition of E.mergent, utilization
of E.mergent’s
NOL and research and development credit carryfowards arising prior
to the
ownership change date were limited to an amount not to exceed the
value of
E.mergent on the ownership change date multiplied by the federal
long-term
tax-exempt rate. If the annual limitation of $1,088 is not utilized
in any
particular year, it will remain available on a cumulative basis
through the
expiration date of the applicable NOL and credit carryforwards.
During the year
ended June 30, 2005, the Company was able to utilize E.mergent’s federal NOL and
research and development credit carryforwards.
SFAS
No.
109, “Accounting
for Income Taxes,”
requires
that a valuation allowance be established when it is more likely
than not that
all or a portion of a deferred tax asset will not be realized.
Valuation allowances were recorded in fiscal 2005, 2004, and 2003
due to the
uncertainty of realization of the assets based upon a number of
factors,
including lack of profitability in 2004, 2003, and 2002 and a cumulative
three-year loss in fiscal 2005. For the years ended June 30, 2005
and 2004, the
Company has recorded a valuation allowance against all of its net
deferred tax
assets. A full valuation allowance was recorded because none of
the net deferred
tax assets would generate a NOL that could be carried back to a
prior tax year.
Based on the Company’s lack of cumulative profitability in recent years it is
more likely than not that all of the net deferred tax assets will
not be
realized that cannot be carried back to prior tax years.
F-41
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
The
net
change in the Company’s domestic valuation allowance was a decrease of $3,598
for the year ended June 30, 2005 and an increase of $4,255 and
$3,527 for the
years ended June 30, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
23. |
Related-Party
Transactions
|
Edward
Dallin Bagley, Chairman of the Board of Directors and significant
shareholder of
the Company, served as a consultant to the Company from November
2002 through
January 2004 and was paid $5 per month for his services. He consulted
with
Company’s management on mergers and financial matters on an as needed basis.
Mr.
Bagley’s services were performed pursuant to an oral agreement, the terms
of
which were approved by the Board of Directors.
The
Company and Mr. Bagley jointly filed an action against National
Union and
Lumbermens Mutual. For additional discussion see Note 15 under
The
Insurance Coverage Action.
At
June
30, 2004, the Company had an intercompany loan due from OM Video
in the amount
of $200. (see Note 4). The loan was provided as working capital.
The balance due
was paid during fiscal 2005.
24. |
Segment
and Geographic Information
|
During
the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004, and 2003, the Company
included in
continuing operations two operating segments - products and business
services.
The Company’s Chief Executive Officer and senior management rely on internal
management reports that provide financial and operational information
by
operating segment. The Company’s management makes financial decisions and
allocates resources based on the information it received from these
internal
management reports. The business services segment was established
in fiscal 2002
as a result of the acquisition of E.mergent in late fiscal 2002
and included
certain operations of E.mergent, the operations of OM Video, and
one software
license agreement associated with the broadcast telephone interface
product
line. During fiscal 2004, the Company sold its business services-related
E.mergent operations. During fiscal 2005, the Company sold its
Canadian business
services-related OM Video operations and accordingly these operations
have been
omitted from these disclosures (see Note 4). Because of the changes
in the
Company’s operations and the information being provided to the Company’s Chief
Executive Officer, the segment disclosures for fiscal 2005, 2004,
and 2003 have
been restated to incorporate these changes.
The
Company’s segments are strategic business units that offer products and
services
to satisfy different customer needs. They are managed separately
because each
segment requires focus and attention on its market and distribution
channel. The
products segment includes products for audio conferencing products,
video
conferencing products, and sound reinforcement products. The business
services
segment included one software license agreement with Comrex associated
with the
broadcast telephone interface product line, a perpetual software
license to use
the Company’s technology, along with one free year of maintenance and support.
(see Note 6).
The
accounting policies of the reportable segments are the same as
those described
in the summary of significant accounting policies. For operating
segments,
segment profit (loss) is measured based on income from continuing
operations
before provision (benefit) for income taxes. Other income (expense),
net is
unallocated.
The
United States was the only country to contribute more than 10 percent
of total
revenues in each fiscal year. The Company’s revenues are substantially
denominated in U.S. dollars and are summarized geographically as
follows (in
thousands):
Years
Ended June 30,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
United
States
|
$
|
23,464
|
$
|
21,654
|
$
|
19,683
|
||||
Canada
|
779
|
346
|
205
|
|||||||
All
other countries
|
7,402
|
5,966
|
8,678
|
|||||||
Total
|
$
|
31,645
|
$
|
27,966
|
$
|
28,566
|
F-42
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
The
Company’s long-lived assets, net of accumulated depreciation, located outside
of
the United States are $0, $33, and $39, for the fiscal years ended
June 30,
2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively.
The
following tables summarize the Company’s segment information:
Product
|
Business
Services
|
Total
|
||||||||
2005:
|
||||||||||
Revenue
|
$
|
31,645
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
31,645
|
||||
Gross
profit
|
16,694
|
-
|
16,694
|
|||||||
2004:
|
||||||||||
Revenue
|
$
|
27,836
|
$
|
130
|
$
|
27,966
|
||||
Gross
profit
|
11,457
|
130
|
11,587
|
|||||||
2003:
|
||||||||||
Revenue
|
$
|
27,512
|
$
|
1,054
|
$
|
28,566
|
||||
Gross
profit
|
9,397
|
1,054
|
10,451
|
The
reconciliation of segment information to the Company’s consolidated totals is as
follows (in thousands):
Year
Ended June 30, 2005
|
||||||||||
Product
|
Corporate
|
Total
|
||||||||
Gross
profit
|
$
|
16,694
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
16,694
|
||||
Marketing
and selling expense
|
(9,070
|
)
|
-
|
(9,070
|
)
|
|||||
General
and administrative expense
|
(343
|
)
|
(5,146
|
)
|
(5,489
|
)
|
||||
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
-
|
2,046
|
2,046
|
|||||||
Research
and product development expense
|
(5,305
|
)
|
-
|
(5,305
|
)
|
|||||
Impairment
charge (see Note 26)
|
(180
|
)
|
-
|
(180
|
)
|
|||||
Restructuring
charge (see Note 26)
|
(110
|
)
|
-
|
(110
|
)
|
|||||
Interest
income
|
-
|
425
|
425
|
|||||||
Interest
expense
|
-
|
(104
|
)
|
(104
|
)
|
|||||
Other
income (expense), net
|
-
|
(3
|
)
|
(3
|
)
|
|||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
-
|
3,248
|
3,248
|
|||||||
Total
income from continuing operations
|
$
|
1,686
|
$
|
466
|
$
|
2,152
|
||||
Depreciation
and amortization expense
|
$
|
2,366
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
2,366
|
||||
Identifiable
assets
|
$
|
16,092
|
$
|
21,929
|
$
|
38,021
|
F-43
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Year
Ended June 30, 2004
|
|||||||||||||
Product
|
Business
Services
|
Corporate
|
Total
|
||||||||||
Gross
profit
|
$
|
11,457
|
$
|
130
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
11,587
|
|||||
Marketing
and selling expense
|
(8,497
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
(8,497
|
)
|
|||||||
General
and administrative expense
|
(406
|
)
|
-
|
(6,361
|
)
|
(6,767
|
)
|
||||||
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
-
|
-
|
(4,080
|
)
|
(4,080
|
)
|
|||||||
Research
and product development expense
|
(4,237
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
(4,237
|
)
|
|||||||
Interest
income
|
-
|
-
|
52
|
52
|
|||||||||
Interest
expense
|
-
|
-
|
(183
|
)
|
(183
|
)
|
|||||||
Other
income (expense), net
|
-
|
-
|
(130
|
)
|
(130
|
)
|
|||||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
-
|
-
|
736
|
736
|
|||||||||
Total
income from continuing operations
|
$
|
(1,683
|
)
|
$
|
130
|
$
|
(9,966
|
)
|
$
|
(11,519
|
)
|
||
Depreciation
and amortization expense
|
$
|
1,934
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
1,934
|
|||||
Identifiable
assets
|
$
|
17,732
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
9,951
|
$
|
27,683
|
Year
Ended June 30, 2003
|
|||||||||||||
Product
|
Business
Services
|
Corporate
|
Total
|
||||||||||
Gross
profit
|
$
|
9,397
|
$
|
1,054
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
10,451
|
|||||
Marketing
and selling expense
|
(7,070
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
(7,070
|
)
|
|||||||
General
and administrative expense
|
(365
|
)
|
-
|
(5,550
|
)
|
(5,915
|
)
|
||||||
Settlement
in shareholders' class action
|
-
|
-
|
(7,325
|
)
|
(7,325
|
)
|
|||||||
Research
and product development expense
|
(3,281
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
(3,281
|
)
|
|||||||
Impairment
losses
|
(5,102
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
(5,102
|
)
|
|||||||
Interest
income
|
-
|
-
|
85
|
85
|
|||||||||
Interest
expense
|
-
|
-
|
(91
|
)
|
(91
|
)
|
|||||||
Other
income (expense), net
|
-
|
-
|
54
|
54
|
|||||||||
Benefit
for income taxes
|
-
|
-
|
1,352
|
1,352
|
|||||||||
Total
income from continuing operations
|
$
|
(6,421
|
)
|
$
|
1,054
|
$
|
(11,475
|
)
|
$
|
(16,842
|
)
|
||
Depreciation
and amortization expense
|
$
|
1,805
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
1,805
|
|||||
Identifiable
assets
|
$
|
14,255
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
14,417
|
$
|
28,672
|
25. |
Closing
of Germany Office
|
During
December 2004, the Company closed its Germany office and consolidated
its
activity with the United Kingdom office. Costs associated with
closing the
Germany office totaled $305 in fiscal 2005 and included operating
leases and
severance payments.
F-44
26. |
Manufacturing
Transition
|
In
May
2005, the Company approved an impairment action and a restructuring
action in
connection with its decision to outsource its Salt Lake City manufacturing
operations. (see Note 27). These actions were intended to improve
the overall
cost structure for the product segment by focusing resources on
other strategic
areas of the business. The Company recorded an impairment charge
of $180 and a
restructuring charge of $110 during the fiscal year ended June
30, 2005 as a
result of these actions. These charges are disclosed separately
in the
accompanying consolidated statements of operations. The impairment
charge
consisted of an immediate impairment of certain property and equipment
of $180
that had value to the Company while it manufactured product but
that was not
purchased by TPM and are not likely to be sold. These assets would
have remained
in service had the Company not outsourced its manufacturing operations.
The
restructuring charge also consisted of severance and other employee
termination
benefits of $70 related to a workforce reduction of approximately
20 employees
who were transferred to an employment agency used by TPM to transition
the
workforce and a charge of $40 related to the operating lease for
the Company’s
manufacturing facilities that would no longer be used by the Company.
(see Note
12). All severance payments were paid by December 31, 2005.
The
following table summarizes the Company’s restructuring charges for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2005:
Severance
|
Manufacturing
Facilities Lease
|
Total
|
||||||||
Balance
at 06/30/2004
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
||||
Restructuring
charge
|
70
|
40
|
110
|
|||||||
Utilized
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Balance
at 06/30/2005
|
$
|
70
|
$
|
40
|
$
|
110
|
27. |
Subsequent
Events
|
The
Shareholders’ Class Action.
On May
23, 2005, the court order was amended to require the Company to
pay cash in lieu
of stock to those members of the class who would otherwise have
been entitled to
receive fewer than 100 shares of stock. On September 29, 2005,
the Company
completed its obligations under the settlement agreement by issuing
a total of
1,148,494 shares of the Company’s common stock to the plaintiff class, including
228,000 shares previously issued in November 2004, and the Company
paid an
aggregate of $127 in cash in lieu of shares to those members of
the class who
would otherwise have been entitled to receive an odd-lot number
of shares or who
resided in states in which there was no exemption available for
the issuance of
shares. The cash payments were calculated on the basis of $2.46
per share which
was equal to the higher of (i) the closing price for the Company’s common stock
as reported by the Pink Sheets on the business day prior to the
date the shares
were mailed, or (ii) the average closing price over the five trading
days prior
to such mailing date. (see Note 15).
F-45
CLEARONE
COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (CON’T)
(in
thousands of dollars, except per share amounts)
Third-Party
Manufacturing Agreement.
On
August 1, 2005, the Company entered into a Manufacturing Agreement
with TPM
pursuant to which the Company agreed to outsource its Salt Lake
City
manufacturing operations. The agreement is for an initial term
of three years,
which shall automatically be extended for successive and additional
terms of one
year each unless terminated by either party upon 120 days advance
notice at any
time after the second anniversary of the agreement. The agreement
generally
provides, among other things, that TPM shall: (i) furnish the necessary
personnel, material, equipment, services, and facilities to be
the exclusive
manufacturer of substantially all the Company’s products that were previously
manufactured at its Salt Lake City, Utah manufacturing facility,
and the
non-exclusive manufacturer of a limited number of products, provided
that the
total cost to the Company (including price, quality, logistic cost,
and terms
and conditions of purchase) is competitive; (ii) provide repair
service,
warranty support, and proto-type services for new product introduction
on terms
to be agreed upon by the parties; (iii) purchase certain items
of the Company’s
manufacturing equipment; (iv) lease certain other items of the
Company’s
manufacturing equipment and have a one-year option to purchase
such leased
items; (v) have the right to lease the Company’s former manufacturing employees
from a third-party employee leasing company; and (vi) purchase
the Company’s
parts and materials on hand and in transit at the Company’s cost for such items
with the purchase price payable on a monthly basis when and if
such parts and
materials are used by TPM. The parties also entered into a one-year
sublease for
approximately 12,000 square feet of manufacturing space located
in the Company’s
headquarters in Salt Lake City, Utah, which sublease may be terminated
by either
party upon 90 days notice. The agreement provides that products
shall be
manufactured pursuant to purchase orders submitted by the Company
at purchase
prices to be agreed upon by the parties, subject to adjustment
based upon such
factors as volume, long range forecasts, change orders, etc. The
Company also
granted TPM a right of first refusal to manufacture new products
developed by
the Company at a cost to the Company (including price, quality,
logistic cost,
and terms and conditions of purchase) that is competitive. Costs
associated with
outsourcing the Company’s manufacturing totaled $290 including severance
payments, facilities no longer used by the Company, and impairment
of property
and equipment that will be disposed of. The Company recorded the
charge in the
fiscal 2005 consolidated financial statements. (see Note 26).
Payoff
of Burk Note Receivable.
On
August 22, 2005, the Company entered into a Mutual Release and
Waiver Agreement
with Burk pursuant to which Burk paid $1,346 in full satisfaction
of the
promissory note, which included a discount of $119. As part of
the Mutual
Release and Waiver Agreement, the Company waived any right to future
commission
payments from Burk and both parties granted mutual releases to
one another with
respect to claims and liabilities. (see Note 5).
Sale
of Conferencing Services.
In
January 2006, the Company received the approximately $1,000 in
the Indemnity
Escrow account from Premiere. (see Note 4).
Settlement
Agreement and Release.
The
Company entered into a settlement agreement and release with its
former
Vice-President - Human Resources in connection with the cessation
of her
employment, which generally provided for her resignation from her
position and
employment with the Company, the payment of severance, and a general
release of
claims against the Company by her. On February 20, 2006, an agreement
was
entered into which generally provided for a severance payment of
$93.3 and her
surrender and delivery to the Company of 145,000 stock options
(86,853 of which
were vested).
F-46