FARO TECHNOLOGIES INC - Annual Report: 2005 (Form 10-K)
UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-K
þ
|
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE
ACT OF
1934
|
For
the fiscal year ended December 31,
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 0-23081
FARO
TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
(Exact
name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
Florida
|
59-3157093
|
|
(State
or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification
Number)
|
125
Technology Park, Lake Mary,
FL
|
32746
|
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip
code)
|
(Registrant’s
telephone number, including area code): (407) 333-9911
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
None
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Common
Stock, par value $.001
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined
in
Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes þ
No
o
Indicate
by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act. Yes o
No
þ
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to
be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during
the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements
for
the past 90 days. Yes þ
No
o
Indicate
by check mark 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 definite proxy or information statements
incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to
this
Form 10-K. Yes þ
No
o
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of “accelerated filer” and
“large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer o | Accelerated filer þ | Non-accelerated filer o |
As
of
June 19, 2006, there were outstanding 14,349,726 shares of common stock. The
aggregate market value of the voting stock held by non-affiliates of the
Registrant as of June 19, 2006 was $168 million based on the last sale on such
date on the NASDAQ National Market.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
None.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Page
PART
I
|
1
|
|
Item
1.
|
Business.
|
2
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors.
|
10
|
Item
1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments.
|
17
|
Item
2.
|
Properties.
|
18
|
Item
3.
|
Legal
Proceedings.
|
18
|
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
|
21
|
PART
II
|
22
|
|
Item
5.
|
Market
For Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder
Matters.
|
22
|
Item
6.
|
Selected
Financial Data.
|
23
|
Item
7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of
|
|
Operations.
|
23
|
|
Item
7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
|
36
|
Item
8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data.
|
37
|
Item
9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure.
|
66
|
Item
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures.
|
66
|
Item
9B.
|
Other
Information.
|
69
|
PART
III
|
70
|
|
Item
10.
|
Directors
and Executive Officers of the Registrant.
|
70
|
Item
11.
|
Executive
Compensation.
|
75
|
Item
12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management.
|
79
|
Item
13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions.
|
81
|
Item
14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services.
|
81
|
PART
IV
|
83
|
|
Item
15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules.
|
83
|
i
PART
I
CAUTIONARY
STATEMENTS FOR FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
FARO
Technologies, Inc. (“FARO”, the “Company”, “us”, “we”, or “our”) has made
“forward-looking statements” in this report (within the meaning of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995). Statements that are not historical
facts or that describe our plans, beliefs, goals, intentions, objectives,
projections, expectations, assumptions, strategies, or future events are
forward-looking statements. In addition, words such as “may,” “will,” “believe,”
“plan,” “should,” “could,” “seek,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “estimate,”
“goal,” “objective,” “project,” “forecast,” “target, “ “goal” and similar words,
or discussions of our strategy or other intentions identify forward-looking
statements. Other written or oral statements that constitute forward-looking
statements also may be made by the Company from time to time.
Forward-looking
statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to a number
of known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that could cause
actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such
forward-looking statements. Consequently, undue reliance should not be placed
on
these forward-looking statements. We do not intend to update any forward-looking
statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise,
unless otherwise required by law. Important factors that could cause a material
difference in the actual results from those contemplated in such forward-looking
statements include among others those under “Cautionary Statements” and
elsewhere in this report and the following:
·
|
our
inability to further penetrate our customer base;
|
·
|
development
by others of new or improved products, processes or technologies
that make
our products obsolete or less
competitive;
|
·
|
our
inability to maintain our technological advantage by developing new
products and enhancing our existing
products;
|
·
|
our
ability to successfully identify and acquire target companies or
achieve
expected benefits from acquisitions that are
consumated;
|
·
|
the
cyclical nature of the industries of our customers and the financial
condition of our customers;
|
·
|
the
fact that the market potential for the CAM2 market and the potential
adoption rate for our products are difficult to quantify and
predict;
|
·
|
the
inability to protect our patents and other proprietary rights in
the
United States and foreign countries and the assertion and ultimate
outcome
of infringement claims against us, including the pending suit by
Hexagon’s
Cimcore-Romer subsidiary against
us;
|
·
|
fluctuations
in our annual and quarterly operating results and the inability to
achieve
our financial operating targets as a result of a number of factors
including, without limitation (i) litigation and regulatory action
brought
against us, (ii) quality issues with our products, (iii) excess or
obsolete inventory, (iv) raw material price fluctuations, (v) expansion
of
our manufacturing capability and other inflationary pressures, (vi)
the
size and timing of customer orders, (vii) the amount of time that
it takes
to fulfill orders and ship our products, (viii) the length of our
sales
cycle to new customers and the time and expense incurred in further
penetrating our existing customer base, (ix) costs associated with
new
product introductions, such as product development, marketing, assembly
line start-up costs and low introductory period production volumes,
(x)
the timing and market acceptance of new products and product enhancements,
(xi) customer order deferrals in anticipation of new products and
product
enhancements, (xii) our success in expanding our sales and marketing
programs, (xiii) costs associated with opening new sales offices
outside
of the United States, (xiv) fluctuations in revenue without proportionate
adjustments in fixed costs, (xv) the efficiencies achieved in managing
inventories and fixed assets, (xvi) investments in potential acquisitions
or strategic sales, product or other initiatives, (xvii) shrinkage
or
other inventory losses due to product obsolescence, scrap or material
price changes, (xviii) adverse changes in the manufacturing industry
and
general economic conditions, and (xiv) other factors including the
cost of
investigation and ongoing litigation expenses noted herein;
|
1
·
|
the
outcome of the purported class action
lawsuit;
|
·
|
our
inability to successfully implement the requirements of Restriction
of use
of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) and Waste Electrical and Electronic
Equipment (WEEE) compliance into our
products;
|
·
|
the
inability of our products to displace traditional measurement devices
and
attain broad market acceptance;
|
·
|
the
impact of competitive products and pricing in the CAM2 market and
the
broader market for measurement and inspection devices;
|
·
|
the
effects of increased competition as a result of recent consolidation
in
the CAM2 market;
|
·
|
risks
associated with expanding international operations, such as fluctuations
in currency exchange rates, difficulties in staffing and managing
foreign
operations, political and economic instability, and the burdens and
potential exposure of complying with a wide variety of U.S. and foreign
laws and labor practices;
|
·
|
our
inability to maintain our level of sales or grow sales in China as
a
result of, among other things, the impact of our investigation of
potential violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and
modifications to our business practices in
China;
|
·
|
higher
than expected increases in expenses relating to our Asia Pacific
expansion
or our Swiss manufacturing
facility;
|
·
|
our
inability to find less expensive alternatives to stock options to
attract
and retain employees;
|
·
|
difficulties
in recruiting research and development engineers, and application
engineers;
|
·
|
the
failure to effectively manage our
growth;
|
·
|
variations
in the effective income tax rate and the difficulty in predicting
the tax
rate on a quarterly and annual basis;
|
·
|
the
loss of key suppliers and the inability to find sufficient alternative
suppliers in a reasonable period or on commercially reasonable terms;
and
|
·
|
the
matters set forth under “Cautionary Statements” in “Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations”
below.
|
Item
1.
|
Business.
|
The
Company designs, develops, manufactures, markets and supports portable, software
driven, 3-D measurement systems that are used in a broad range of manufacturing,
industrial, building construction and forensic applications. The Company’s Faro
Arm, Faro Scan Arm and Faro Gage articulated measuring devices, the Faro Laser
Tracker, and their companion CAM2 software, provide for Computer-Aided Design
(CAD)-based inspection and/or factory-level statistical process control.
Together, these products integrate the measurement, quality inspection, and
reverse engineering functions with CAD software to improve productivity, enhance
product quality and decrease rework and scrap in the manufacturing process.
The
Company uses the acronym “CAM2” for this process, which stands for
computer-aided manufacturing measurement. The Company’s Digital Template
articulated measuring device and its related software are used to measure the
shape of existing counter tops and other structures in residential or commercial
buildings to provide the data required to manufacture replacement countertops
or
other structures. The Digital Template reduces the time required to measure
these existing products and to provide the data to manufacturing machines to
create the replacement structures, compared to traditional techniques. In March
2005 the Company acquired iQvolution AG, a German designer, developer and
manufacturer of a portable laser-based device for measuring the detailed
composition of factories, oil refineries and other structures. This device
and
its related software, which the Company sells under the product name Laser
Scanner LS also has forensic applications such as capturing detailed 3-D crime
scene information. As of June 2006, the Company’s products have been purchased
by approximately 4,900 customers worldwide, ranging from small machine shops
to
such large manufacturing and industrial companies as Audi, Bell Helicopter,
Boeing, British Aerospace, Caterpillar, Daimler Chrysler, General Electric,
General Motors, Honda, Johnson Controls, Komatsu Dresser, Lockheed Martin,
Nissan, Siemens and Volkswagen, among many others.
2
We
were
founded in 1982 and we re-incorporated in Florida in 1992. Our worldwide
headquarters are located at 125 Technology Park, Lake Mary, Florida 32746,
and
our telephone number is (407) 333-9911.
Industry
Background
The
Company believes that there are three principal forces driving the need for
its
products and services: 1) the widespread use by manufacturers of CAD in product
development which shortens product cycles; 2) the adoption by manufacturers
of
quality standards such as Six Sigma and ISO-9000 (and its offshoot QS-9000),
which stress the measurement of every step in a manufacturing process to reduce
or eliminate defects, and 3) the inability of traditional measurement devices
to
address many manufacturing problems, especially those related to large
components for products such as automobiles, aircraft, heavy duty construction
equipment, factory retrofits and countertops.
CAD
changes the manufacturing process.
The
creation of physical products involves the processes of design, engineering,
production and measurement and quality inspection. These basic processes have
been profoundly affected by the computer hardware and software revolution that
began in the 1980s. CAD software was developed to automate the design process,
providing manufacturers with computerized 3-D design capability. Today, most
manufacturers use some form of CAD software to create designs and engineering
specifications for new products and to quantify and modify designs and
specifications for existing products. The use of CAD can shorten the time
between design changes. While
manufacturers previously designed their products to be in production for longer
periods of time, current manufacturing practices must accommodate more frequent
product introductions and modifications, while satisfying more stringent quality
and safety standards. Assembly
fixtures and measurement tools must be figuratively linked to the CAD design
to
enable production to keep up with the rate of design change.
Quality
standards dictate measurement to reduce defects. QS-9000
is the name given to the Quality System Requirements of the automotive industry
that were developed by Chrysler, Ford, General Motors and major truck
manufacturers and issued in late 1994. Companies that become registered under
QS-9000 are considered to have higher standards and better quality products.
Six
Sigma embodies the principles of total quality management that focus on
measuring results and reducing product or service failure rates to 3.4 per
million. All aspects of a Six Sigma company’s infrastructure must be analyzed,
and if necessary, restructured to increase revenues and raise customer
satisfaction levels. The all-encompassing nature of these and other quality
standards has resulted in manufacturers measuring every aspect of their process,
including stages of product assembly that may have never been measured before,
in part because of the lack of suitable measurement equipment.
3
Traditional
products don’t measure up.
A
significant aspect of the manufacturing process, which traditionally has not
benefited from computer-aided technology, is measurement and quality inspection.
Historically, manufacturers have measured and inspected products using
hand-measurement tools such as scales, calipers, micrometers and plumb lines
for
simple measuring tasks, test (or check) fixtures for certain large manufactured
products and traditional coordinate measurement machines (CMM) for objects
that
require higher precision measurement. However, the broader utility of each
of
these measurement methods is limited.
Although
hand-measurement tools are often appropriate for simple geometric measurements,
including hole diameters or length and width of a rectangular component, their
use for complex part measurements, such as the fender of a car, is limited.
Also
these devices do not allow for the measurements to be directly compared to
the
CAD model of the part. Test fixtures (customized fixed tools used to make
comparative measurements of complex production parts to “master parts”) are
relatively expensive and must be reworked or discarded each time a dimensional
change is made in the part being measured. In addition, these manual measuring
devices do not permit the manufacturer to compare the dimensions of an object
with its CAD model. Traditional templates made of wood or Styrofoam for
countertop design are prone to breakage and dimensional errors. The template
making process is time consuming as well.
Conventional
CMMs are generally large, fixed-base machines that provide very high levels
of
precision and provide a link to the CAD model of the object being measured.
However, fixed-base CMMs require the object being measured be brought to the
CMM
and the object fit within the CMMs measurement grid. As manufactured
subassemblies increase in size and become integrated into even larger
assemblies, they become less transportable, thus diminishing the utility of
a
conventional CMM. Consequently, manufacturers must continue to use
hand-measuring tools, or expensive customized test fixtures, in order to measure
large or unconventionally shaped objects. Some parts or assemblies are not
easily accessible and cannot be measured at all using traditional
devices.
Escalating
global competition has created a demand for higher quality products with shorter
life cycles. Manufacturers require more rapid design, greater control of the
manufacturing process, tools to compare components to their CAD specifications
and the ability to precisely measure components that cannot be measured or
inspected by conventional devices. Moreover, they increasingly require
measurement capabilities to be integrated into the manufacturing process and
to
be available on the factory floor.
FARO
Products
The
Faro Arm.
The
Faro
Arm is a combination of a portable, six or seven-axis, instrumented articulated
measurement arm, a computer, and software programs under the acronym CAM2.
q
|
Articulated
Arm
-
Each articulated arm is comprised of three major joints, each of
which may
consist of one, two or three axes of motion. The articulated arm
is
available in a variety of sizes, configurations and precision levels
that
are suitable for a broad range of applications. To take a measurement,
the
operator simply touches the object to be measured with a probe at
the end
of the arm and presses a button. Data can be captured at either individual
points or a series of points. Digital rotational transducers located
at
each of the joints of the arm measure the angles at those joints.
This
rotational measurement data is transmitted to an on-board controller
that
converts the arm angles to precise locations in 3-D space using “xyz”
position coordinates and “ijk” orientation
coordinates.
|
4
q
|
Computer
-
The Company pre-installs its CAM2 software on either a notebook or
desktop
style computer, depending on the customer’s need, and the measuring
device, computer and installed software are sold as a system. The
computers are not manufactured by the Company, but are purchased
from
various suppliers.
|
q
|
CAM2
Software
-
See separate section on CAM2 Software
below.
|
The
Digital Template.
A lower
accuracy articulated arm device targeted at the home remodeling market. This
device is designed to replace traditional physical templates used in countertop,
cabinet and other home remodeling applications.
The
Faro Scan Arm.
The Faro
Scan Arm is a Faro Arm equipped with a combination of a hard probe (like that
in
the Faro Arm) and
a
non-contact line laser probe. This product provides our customers the ability
to
measure their products without touching them.
The
Faro Gage. Sold
as a
combination of an articulated arm device with a computer and software, the
Faro
Gage is a smaller, higher accuracy version of the Faro Arm product. What
distinguishes the Faro Gage from the Faro Arm are the special mounting features
and the basic software which are unique to the Faro Gage. The Faro Gage is
targeted at machine tools, and bench tops around machine tools, where basic
measurements of smaller machined parts must be measured. As such, the CAM2
software developed for this device features basic 2-D and 3-D measurements
common to these applications. (See also “Faro Gage Software”
below.)
The
Faro Laser Tracker. A
combination of a portable, large-volume laser measurement tool, a computer,
and
CAM2 software programs.
q
|
Laser
Tracker -
The Faro Laser Tracker utilizes an ultra-precise laser beam to measure
objects of up to 230 feet. It enables manufacturing, engineering,
and
quality control professionals to measure and inspect large parts,
machine
tools and other large objects on-site and/or in-process. With its
greater
angular resolution, repeatability, and accuracy, the Faro Laser Tracker
advances already-proven tracker technology. Among its many enhanced
features is SuperADM, which improves upon existing Absolute Distance
Measurement technology by providing the time-saving ability to reacquire
the laser beam without the need to return to a known reference point
or
the need to hold the target
stationary.
|
q
|
Computer
-
See description under Faro Arm
above.
|
q
|
CAM2
Software
--
See separate section on CAM2 software below.
|
The
Faro Laser Scanner LS. The
FARO
Laser Scanner LS utilizes laser technology to measure and collect a cloud of
data points, allowing for the detailed and precise three-dimensional rendering
of an object or an area as large as a factory. This technology is currently
used
for factory planning, facility life-cycle management, quality control, forensic
analysis and in general, capturing large volumes of three-dimensional data.
Laser scanning technology simplifies modeling, reduces project time and
maintains or increases the accuracy of the image. The resulting data is used
with major CAD systems or FARO’s own proprietary software for the applications
listed above.
5
CAM2
Software. CAM2
is
the Company’s family of proprietary CAD-based measurement and statistical
process control software. The CAM2 product line includes the following software
programs, many of which are translated into multiple languages:
q
|
CAM2
Measure X allows
users to compare measurements of manufactured components or assemblies
with the corresponding CAD data for the components or assemblies.
CAM2
Measure X is offered with the Faro Arm and the Faro Laser Tracker.
|
q
|
CAM2
SPC Process
allows for
the collection, organization, and presentation of measurement data
factory-wide. Not limited to measurements from the Faro Arm or Faro
Laser
Tracker, CAM2
SPC Process accepts data from CMM and other computer-based measurement
devices from many different measurement applications along the production
line.
|
q
|
Soft
Check Tool is
a custom software program designed to lead an operator through a
measurement process on the Faro Arm or Faro Laser Tracker with minimal
training. These programs are created by the Company from specifications
provided by the customer.
|
q
|
Faro
Gage Software includes
a dedicated graphical interface designed for the ease of use of the
operator. Capable of producing graphical and tabular reports, the
software
runs a library of gauging and Soft Check
tools.
|
Laser
Scanner LS Software. The
Company has a number of programs available for its Laser Scanner LS product,
as
follows:
q
|
Faro
Scout is
a powerful software tool for displaying 3-D measurements and navigation
in
huge pointclouds.
|
q
|
Faro
Scene is
software for displaying, analyzing, administration and editing of
3-D
measurements in huge pointclouds including registration of multiple
pointclouds.
|
q
|
Farocloud
for AutoCAD
supports the visualization and analysis of millions of 3-D points
in the
well known AutoCAD software environment. As-built documentation of
industrial structures, historic buildings or many more applications
are
possible.
|
q
|
Faroworks
is
a web-based tool for the administration of complex projects and navigation
from floorplan to scan with links to
measurements.
|
q
|
Walkinside
is
a high performance 3-D viewer with full room measurement and other
features.
|
Customers
As
of
June 2006, the
Company’s products have been purchased by approximately 4,900 customers
worldwide, including small machine shops, large manufacturing and industrial
companies, home improvement shops, universities and law enforcement agencies.
The Company’s ten largest customers by revenue represented an aggregate of 8.9%
of the Company’s total revenues in 2005. No customer represented more than 2.5%
of the Company’s sales in 2005.
6
Sales
and Marketing
The
Company directs its sales and marketing efforts on a decentralized basis in
three main regions around the world: Americas, Europe/Africa and Asia/Pacific.
The regional headquarters for the Americas is in the Company’s headquarters in
Lake Mary, Florida and the Europe/Africa regional headquarters is in Stuttgart,
Germany. The Company opened a regional headquarters for the Asia/Pacific region
in Singapore in 2005. At December 31, 2005 the Company employed 86, 113, and
83
sales and marketing specialists in the Americas, Europe/Africa, and Asia/Pacific
regions, respectively. The Company has direct sales representation in the United
States, Canada, Brazil, Germany, United Kingdom, France, Spain, Italy, Poland,
Netherlands, India, South Korea, China, Singapore, Malaysia, Vietnam, and Japan.
See Footnote 20 to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, incorporated
herein by reference to Item 8 hereof, for financial information about the
Company’s foreign and domestic operations and export sales required by this
Item.
The
Company uses a process of integrated lead qualification and sales demonstration.
Once a customer opportunity is identified, the Company employs a team-based
sales approach involving inside and outside sales personnel who are supported
by
application engineers. With the exception of the digital template product which
is sold by Faro Arm sales people, each product has a separate sales force,
reporting to regional sales managers for all products. The Company employs
a
variety of marketing techniques to promote brand awareness and customer
identification.
Research
and Development
The
Company believes that its future success depends on its ability to maintain
technological leadership, which will require ongoing enhancements of its
products and the development of new applications and products that provide
3-D
measurement solutions. Accordingly, the Company intends to continue to make
substantial investments in the development of new technologies, the
commercialization of new products that build on the Company’s existing
technological base, and the enhancement and development of additional
applications for its products.
The
Company’s research and development efforts are directed primarily at enhancing
the functional adaptability of its current products and developing new and
innovative products that respond to specific requirements of the emerging market
for 3-D measurement systems. The Company’s research and development efforts have
been devoted primarily to mechanical hardware, electronics and software. The
Company’s engineering development efforts will continue to focus on enhancing
our existing products and developing new products for the CAM2
market.
At
December 31, 2005, the Company employed 55 scientists
and technicians in its research and development efforts. Research and
development expenses were approximately $6.4 million in 2005 as compared to
$5.4
million in 2004 and $4.5 million in 2003. We believe that the continual
development or acquisition of innovative new products is critical to our future
success. The field of CAM2 and more broadly, 3-D measurement, continues to
expand and new technologies and applications will be essential to competing
in
this market.
Research
and development activities, especially with respect to new products and
technologies, are subject to significant risks, and there can be no assurance
that any of the Company’s research and development activities will be completed
successfully or on schedule, or, if so completed, will be commercially
accepted.
Intellectual
Property
The
Company holds or has pending 68 patents in the United States and related patents
worldwide. The Company also has 23 registered or pending trademarks in the
United States and worldwide.
The
Company relies on a combination of contractual provisions and trade secret
laws
to protect its proprietary information. There can be no assurance that the
steps
taken by the Company to protect its trade secrets and proprietary information
will be sufficient to prevent misappropriation of its proprietary information
or
preclude third-party development of similar intellectual property.
7
Despite
the Company’s efforts to protect its proprietary rights, unauthorized parties
may attempt to copy aspects of the Company’s products or to obtain and use
information that the Company regards as proprietary. The Company intends to
vigorously defend its proprietary rights against infringement by third parties.
However, policing unauthorized use of the Company’s products is difficult,
particularly overseas, and the Company is unable to determine the extent to
which piracy of its software products exists. In addition, the laws of some
foreign countries do not protect the Company’s proprietary rights to the same
extent as the laws of the United States.
The
Company does not believe that any of its products infringe on the proprietary
rights of third parties. There can be no assurance, however, that third parties
will not claim infringement by the Company with respect to current or future
products. Any such claims, with or without merit, could be time-consuming,
result in costly litigation, cause product shipment delays or require the
Company to enter into royalty or licensing agreements. Such royalty or licensing
agreements, if required, may not be available on terms acceptable to the Company
or at all, which could have a material adverse effect upon the Company’s
business, operating results and financial condition. The Company has been
defending itself in a patent infringement suit brought against the Company
by
Cimcore-Romer (a subsidiary of Hexagon) on November 25, 2003. (See Item 3 -
Legal Proceedings)
Manufacturing
and Assembly
The
Company manufactures its products at its headquarters in Lake Mary, Florida,
and
at its plants in Kennett Square, Pennsylvania, Schaffhausen, Switzerland,
Stuttgart, Germany, and Singapore. Manufacturing consists primarily of
assembling finished products with components and subassemblies, purchased from
suppliers, into finished products. The primary components, which include
machined parts and electronic circuit boards, are produced by subcontractors
according to the Company’s specifications. All products are assembled,
calibrated and tested for accuracy and functionality before shipment. In limited
circumstances, the Company performs in-house circuit board assembly and part
machining.
The
Company’s manufacturing, engineering, and design headquarters have been
registered to the ISO-9001 standard since July 1998. Semi-annual surveillance
audits have documented continuous improvement to this multinational standard.
The Company continues to examine its scope of registration as the business
evolves and has chosen English as the standard business language for its
operations. This decision is expected to significantly influence the Company’s
operations and documentation globally. This has been done in concert with the
ISO Standard Registrar, and is expected to increase customer confidence in
the
Company’s products and services worldwide.
The
Company takes a global approach to ISO registration, seeking to have all
locations registered with identical scope of accreditation and capabilities
for
the products generated and serviced. In 2004 FARO took this to the highest
level
possible. Our manufacturing sites in Lake Mary, Kennett Square, Stuttgart,
and
Schaffhausen are now jointly registered to ISO-9001:2000. In addition, our
service sites in the United States, Germany, Switzerland, Japan, China, and
Brazil have been jointly accredited to ISO-17025
for Calibration and Certification Laboratories by the Laboratory Accreditation
Bureau.
8
Competition
Our
portable measurement systems compete in the broad market for measurement devices
for manufacturing and industrial applications which, in addition to portable
articulated arms, laser tracker and laser scanner products, consist of
fixed-base CMMs, templates and go/no-go gages, check fixtures, and handheld
measurement tools. The broad market for measurement devices is highly
competitive. In the Faro Gage product line, we compete with manufacturers of
handheld measurement tools and fixed-base CMMs, including some large,
well-established companies. In the Faro Arm, Faro Scan Arm, Faro Laser Tracker,
and Faro Laser Scanner LS product lines, we compete primarily with Hexagon
Metrology, a division of Hexagon. We also compete in these product lines with
a
number of other smaller competitors.
We
will
be required to make continued investments in technology and product development
to maintain the technological advantage that we believe we currently have over
our competition. Some of our competitors, including some manufacturers of fixed
based CMMs and Hexagon, possess substantially greater financial, technical,
and
marketing resources than we possess. Moreover, we cannot be certain that our
technology or our product development efforts will allow us to successfully
compete as the industry evolves. As the market for our portable measurement
systems expands, additional competition may emerge and the Company’s existing
and future competitors may commit more resources to the markets in which the
Company participates. For example, fixed-base CMM manufacturers are introducing
CAD-based inspection software in response to the trend toward CAD-based factory
floor metrology. In addition, some fixed-base CMM manufacturers are
miniaturizing and increasing the mobility of their conventional CMMs.
Government
Regulation
Our
operations are subject to numerous governmental laws and regulations, including
those governing antitrust and competition, the environment, securities
transactions and disclosures, import and export of products, currency
conversions and repatriation, taxation of foreign earnings and earnings of
expatriate personnel and use of local employees and suppliers. Our foreign
operations are subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (“FCPA”), which
makes illegal any payments to foreign officials or employees of foreign
governments that are intended to induce them to use their influence to assist
us
or to gain any improper advantage for us. The Company operates in certain
regions that are more highly prone to risk under the FCPA.
Manufacturers
of electrical goods will become subject to the European Union’s Restrictions of
Hazardous Substances, (“RoHS”) and Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
(“WEEE”) directives, which take effect during 2006. Parallel initiatives are
being proposed in other jurisdictions, including several states in the United
States and China. RoHS prohibits the use of lead, mercury and certain other
specified substances in electronics products, and WEEE makes producers of
electrical goods financially responsible for specified collection, recycling,
treatment, and disposal of covered electronic products and components.
We
expect
that we will have our products in compliance with the RoHS directive in time.
However, if we are unable to do so, we would be unable to sell our products
in
European Union countries, as well as possible several states in the United
States and China, which would have a material adverse effect on our sales and
results of operation.
Backlog
At
December 31, 2005, the
Company had orders representing approximately $3.5
million in
product sales outstanding. The majority of these specific orders were shipped
by
June 16, 2006, and, as of June 16, 2006, the Company had orders representing
approximately $7.3 million in
product sales outstanding. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, the Company had orders
representing approximately $5.1 million and $7.5 million in product sales
outstanding, respectively.
9
The
Company’s decreased backlog at December 31, 2005 is the result of improved
order-to-shipment turnaround times for its laser tracker and articulated arm
product lines in 2005 to meet customer demand. The Company believes that
substantially all of the outstanding sales orders as of June 16, 2006 will
be
shipped during 2006.
Employees
At
December 31, 2005, the Company had 657 full-time employees, consisting of
282 sales and marketing professionals, 134 production staff, 55 research and
development staff, 80 administrative staff, and 106 customer service/application
engineering specialists. The Company is not a party to any collective bargaining
agreements and believes its employee relations are good. Management believes
that its future growth and success will depend in part on its ability to retain
and continue to attract highly skilled personnel. The Company anticipates that
it will be able to obtain the additional personnel required to satisfy its
staffing requirements over the foreseeable future.
Available
Information
We
maintain a web site with the address www.faro.com. Information contained on
our
web site is not a part of, or incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report
on Form 10-K. We make available free of charge through our web site our
Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current
Reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements and amendments to these reports, as
soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file these reports with,
or furnish these reports to, the Securities and Exchange Commission.
We
were
organized in 1982 and are incorporated in Florida.
Item
1A. Risk
Factors.
We
discuss expectations regarding our future performance and make other
forward-looking statements in our annual and quarterly reports, press releases
and other written and oral statements. These forward-looking statements are
based on currently available competitive, financial and economic data and our
operating plans. They are inherently uncertain, and investors must recognize
that events could turn out to be significantly different from our expectations.
The following discussion of risks and uncertainties which is not exclusive,
highlights some important factors to consider when evaluating our trends and
future results.
Our
customers’ buying process for our products is highly decentralized, and
therefore, it typically requires significant time and expense for us to further
penetrate the potential market of a specific customer, which may delay our
ability to generate additional revenue.
Our
success will depend, in part, on our ability to further penetrate our customer
base. During 2005, 40.6% of our revenue was attributable to sales to our
existing customers, compared to 52.7% in 2004. If we are not able to continue
to
penetrate our existing customer base, our sales growth will be impaired. Most
of
our customers have a decentralized buying process for measurement devices.
Thus,
we must spend significant time and resources to increase revenues from a
specific customer. For example, we may provide products to only one of our
customers manufacturing facilities or for a specific product line within a
manufacturing facility. We cannot be certain that we will be able to maintain
or
increase the amount of sales to our existing customers.
10
Others
may develop products that make our products obsolete or less competitive.
The
CAM2
market is emerging and could be characterized by rapid technological change.
Others may develop new or improved products, processes or technologies that
may
make our products obsolete or less competitive. We cannot assure you that we
will be able to adapt to evolving markets and technologies or maintain our
technological advantage.
Our
success will depend, in part, on our ability to maintain our technological
advantage by developing new products and applications and enhancing our existing
products. Developing new products and applications and enhancing our existing
products can be complex and time-consuming and will require substantial
investment by us. Significant delays in new product releases or difficulties
in
developing new products could adversely affect our revenues and results of
operations. Because our customers are concentrated in a few industries, a
reduction in sales to any one of these industries could cause a significant
decline in our revenues.
An
economic slowdown in manufacturing will affect our growth and profitability.
A
significant portion of our sales are to manufacturers in the automotive,
aerospace and heavy equipment industries. We are dependent upon the continued
growth, viability and financial stability of our customers in these industries,
which are highly cyclical and dependent upon the general health of the economy
and consumer spending. The cyclical nature of these industries may exert
significant influence on our revenues and results of operations. In addition,
the volume of orders from our customers and the prices of our products may
be
adversely impacted by decreases in capital spending by a significant portion
of
our customers during recessionary periods. In addition, we generate significant
accounts receivable in connection with providing products and services to our
customers. If one or more of our significant customers were to become insolvent
or otherwise were unable to pay for the products provided by us, our operating
results and financial condition would be adversely affected.
Our
inability to protect our patents and proprietary rights in the United States
and
foreign countries could adversely affect our revenues.
Our
success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent
and
other proprietary right protection for our processes and products in the United
States and other countries. We also rely upon trade secrets, technical know-how
and continuing inventions to maintain our competitive position. We seek to
protect our technology and trade secrets, in part, by confidentiality agreements
with our employees and contractors. Our employees may breach these agreements
or
our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered
by
inventors. If we are unable to obtain or maintain protection of our patents,
trade secrets and other proprietary rights, we may not be able to prevent third
parties from using our proprietary rights.
Our
patent protection involves complex legal and technical questions. Our patents
may be challenged, narrowed, invalidated or circumvented. We may be able to
protect our proprietary rights from infringement by third parties only to the
extent that our proprietary processes and products are covered by valid and
enforceable patents or are effectively maintained as trade secrets. Furthermore,
others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or design
around our patented technologies. Litigation or other proceedings to defend
or
enforce our intellectual property rights could require us to spend significant
time and money and could otherwise adversely affect our business.
11
Claims
from others that we infringe their intellectual property rights may adversely
affect our operations.
From
time
to time we receive notices from others claiming we infringe their intellectual
property rights. The number of these claims may grow. Responding to these claims
may require us to enter into royalty or licensing agreements on unfavorable
terms, require us to stop selling or to redesign affected products or require
us
to pay damages. Any litigation or interference proceedings, regardless of their
outcome, may be costly and may require significant time and attention of our
management and technical personnel.
On
November 25, 2003, Cimcore-Romer (now a division of Hexagon) filed a patent
infringement suit against us in the Federal District Court for the Southern
District of California alleging that certain of our products sold in the United
States, including the FARO Arm, infringe U.S. Patent 5,829,148 (‘148 patent). A
summary of this litigation is set forth in Item 3 (Legal Proceedings) of this
report.
In
the
event of an adverse ruling in the Cimcore-Romer litigation, we could be required
to pay substantial damages, cease the manufacturing, use and sale of any
infringing products, discontinue the use of certain processes or obtain a
license, if available, from Cimcore-Romer with royalty payment obligations
by
us. At this time, however, the Company cannot estimate the potential impact,
if
any, that might result from this suit, and therefore, no provision has been
made
to cover such expense.
We
may not be able to achieve financial results within our target goals, and our
operating results may fluctuate due to a number of factors, many of which are
beyond our control.
Our
ability to achieve financial results that are within our goals is subject to
a
number of factors, some of which our beyond our control. Moreover, our annual
and quarterly operating results have varied significantly in the past and likely
will vary significantly in the future. Factors that cause our financial results
to fluctuate include those set forth elsewhere in this report and the following:
·
|
the
size and timing of customer orders, many of which are received towards
the
end of the quarter;
|
·
|
the
effectiveness of sales promotions and sales of demonstration
equipment;
|
·
|
geographic
expansion in the Asia/Pacific region and other regions and the effects
of
governmental or other actions relating to our operations in
China;
|
·
|
the
loss of future business in China as a result of, among other things,
the
outcome of our investigation into potential violations of the Foreign
Corrupt Practices Act including the expense, distraction and changes
in
personnel, as well as modifications to our business practices and
compliance programs;
|
·
|
training
and ramp-up time for new sales
people;
|
·
|
investments
in technologies and new products;
|
·
|
our
effective tax rate;
|
·
|
the
outcomes of the patent infringement lawsuit filed by Cimcore-Romer
and the
purported class action lawsuit;
|
12
·
|
the
amount of time that it takes to fulfill orders and ship our products;
|
·
|
the
length of our sales cycle to new customers and the time and expense
incurred in further penetrating our existing customer base;
|
·
|
increases
in operating expenses for product development and new product marketing;
|
·
|
costs
associated with new product introductions, such as assembly line
start-up
costs and low introductory period production volumes;
|
·
|
the
timing and market acceptance of new products and product enhancements;
|
·
|
customer
order deferrals in anticipation of new products and product enhancements;
|
·
|
our
success in expanding our sales and marketing programs;
|
·
|
start-up
costs and ramp-up time associated with opening new sales offices
outside
of the United States;
|
·
|
potential
decreases in revenue without proportionate adjustments in fixed costs;
|
·
|
the
efficiencies achieved in managing inventories and fixed
assets;
|
·
|
investments
in potential acquisitions or strategic sales, product or other
initiatives;
|
·
|
shrinkage
or other inventory losses due to product obsolescence, scrap or material
price changes; and
|
·
|
adverse
changes in the manufacturing industry and general economic conditions.
|
Any
one
or a combination of these factors could adversely affect our annual and
quarterly operating results in the future and could cause us to fail to achieve
our target financial results.
The
CAM2 market is an emerging market and our growth depends on the ability of
our
products to attain broad market acceptance.
The
market for traditional fixed-base CMMs, check fixtures, and other handheld
measurement tools is mature. Part of our strategy is to continue to displace
these traditional measurement devices. Displacing traditional measurement
devices and achieving broad market acceptance of our products requires
significant effort to convince manufacturers to reevaluate their historical
measurement procedures and methodologies.
Because
the CAM2 market is emerging, the potential size and growth rate of the CAM2
market is uncertain and difficult to quantify. If the CAM2 market does not
continue to expand or does not expand at least as quickly as we anticipate,
we
may not be able to continue our sales growth, which also may affect our
profitability.
13
We
market
six closely interdependent products (Faro Arm, Digital Template, Scan Arm,
Faro
Laser Scanner LS, Faro Laser Tracker and Faro Gage) and related software for
use
in measurement and inspection applications. Substantially all our revenues
are
currently derived from sales of these products and software and we plan to
continue our business strategy of focusing on the portable software-driven,
3-D
measurement and inspection market. Consequently, our financial performance
will
depend in large part on portable, computer-based measurement and inspection
products achieving broad market acceptance. If our products cannot attain broad
market acceptance, we will not grow as anticipated and may be required to make
increased expenditures on research and development for new applications or
new
products.
We
compete with manufacturers of portable measurement systems and traditional
measurement devices, many of which have more resources than us and may develop
new products and technologies.
The
broad
market for measurement devices is highly competitive. In the Faro Gage product
line, we compete with manufacturers of handheld measurement tools and fixed-base
CMMs, including some large, well-established companies. In the Faro Arm, Faro
Scan Arm, Faro Laser Tracker, and Faro Laser Scanner LS product lines, we
compete primarily with Hexagon Metrology, a division of Hexagon. We also compete
in these product lines with a number of other smaller competitors.
We
will
be required to make continued investments in technology and product development
to maintain the technological advantage that we believe we currently have over
our competition. Some of our competitors, including some manufacturers of fixed
based CMMs and Hexagon, possess substantially greater financial, technical,
and
marketing resources than we possess. Moreover, we cannot be certain that our
technology or our product development efforts will allow us to successfully
compete as the industry evolves. As the market for our portable measurement
systems expands, additional competition may emerge and the Company’s existing
and future competitors may commit more resources to the markets in which the
Company participates. For example, fixed-base CMM manufacturers are introducing
CAD-based inspection software in response to the trend toward CAD-based factory
floor metrology. In addition, some fixed-base CMM manufacturers are
miniaturizing and increasing the mobility of their conventional CMMs.
We
derive a substantial part of our revenues from our international operations,
which are subject to greater volatility and often require more management time
and expense to achieve profitability than our domestic operations.
Since
2000, we have derived approximately half of our sales from international
operations. In our experience, entry into new international markets requires
considerable management time as well as start-up expenses for market
development, hiring and establishing office facilities before any significant
revenues are generated. As a result, initial operations in a new market may
operate at low margins or may be unprofitable.
Our
international operations are subject to various risks, including:
·
|
difficulties
in staffing and managing foreign operations;
|
·
|
political
and economic instability;
|
·
|
unexpected
changes in regulatory requirements and laws;
|
·
|
longer
customer payment cycles and difficulty collecting accounts receivable;
|
·
|
export
duties, import controls and trade restrictions;
|
·
|
governmental
restrictions on the transfer of funds to us from our operations outside
the United States;
|
14
·
|
burdens
of complying with a wide variety of foreign laws and labor practices;
and
|
·
|
fluctuations
in currency exchange rates.
|
Because
our foreign subsidiaries maintain their financial records and statements in
their respective local currencies, our consolidated financial results are
affected by foreign currency translation adjustments. Moreover, several of
the
countries where we operate have emerging or developing economies, which may
be
subject to greater currency volatility, negative growth, high inflation, limited
availability of foreign exchange and other risks. These factors may harm our
results of operations and any measures that we may implement to reduce the
effect of volatile currencies and other risks of our international operations
may not be effective.
In
addition, our foreign operations are subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices
Act, which makes illegal any payments to foreign officials or employees of
foreign governments that are intended to induce them to use their influence
to
assist us or to gain any improper advantage for us. As previously reported
on
the Company’s Form 8-K dated March 15, 2006, the Company learned that its China
subsidiary had made payments to certain customers in China that may have
violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and other applicable laws. We
voluntarily notified the United States Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”) and the United States Department of Justice (“DOJ”) of this matter. If
the SEC or the DOJ determines that violations of the FCPA have occurred, they
could seek civil and criminal sanctions, including monetary penalties, against
the Company and/or certain of its employees, as well as additional changes
to
the Company’s business practices and compliance programs, any of which could
have a material adverse effect on the Company business and financial condition.
In addition, such actions, whether actual or alleged, could damage our
reputation and ability to do business. Further, detecting, investigating, and
resolving such actions is expensive and could consume significant time and
attention of our senior management.
We
may not be able to identify, consummate or achieve expected benefits from
acquisitions.
We
have
completed three significant acquisitions since our initial public offering
in
1997. We may pursue access to additional technologies, complementary product
lines and sales channels through selective acquisitions and strategic
investments. We may not be able to identify and successfully negotiate suitable
acquisitions, obtain financing for future acquisitions on satisfactory terms
or
otherwise complete acquisitions in the future. In the past we have used our
stock as consideration for acquisitions. Our common stock may not remain at
a
price at which it can be used as consideration for acquisitions without diluting
our existing shareholders, and potential acquisition candidates may not view
our
stock attractively.
Realization
of the benefits of acquisitions often requires integration of some or all of
the
acquired companies’ sales and marketing, distribution, manufacturing,
engineering, finance and administrative organizations. The integration of
acquisitions demands substantial attention from senior management and the
management of the acquired companies. Any acquisition may be subject to a
variety of risks and uncertainties including:
·
|
the
inability to assimilate effectively the operations, products, technologies
and personnel of the acquired companies (some of which may be located
in
diverse geographic regions);
|
·
|
the
inability to maintain uniform standards, controls, procedures and
policies;
|
·
|
the
need or obligation to divest portions of the acquired companies;
and
|
15
·
|
the
potential impairment of relationships with customers.
|
We
cannot
assure you that we will be able to integrate successfully any acquisitions,
that
any acquired companies will operate profitably or that we will realize the
expected benefits from any acquisition.
We
may face difficulties managing growth.
If
our business continues to grow rapidly in the
future, we expect it to result in:
·
|
increased
complexity
|
·
|
increased
responsibility for existing and new management personnel; and
|
·
|
incremental
strain on our operations and financial and management systems.
|
If
we are
not able to manage future growth, our business, financial condition and
operating results may be harmed.
Our
dependence on suppliers for materials could impair our ability to manufacture
our products.
Outside
vendors provide key components used by us in the manufacture of our products.
Although we believe that alternative sources for these components are available,
any supply interruption in a limited source component would harm our ability
to
manufacture our products until a new source of supply is identified. In
addition, an uncorrected defect or supplier’s variation in a component, either
known or unknown to us, or incompatible with our manufacturing processes, could
harm our ability to manufacture our products. We may not be able to find a
sufficient alternative supplier in a reasonable period, or on commercially
reasonable terms, if at all. If we fail to obtain a supplier for the manufacture
of components of our potential products, we may experience delays or
interruptions in our operations, which would adversely affect our results of
operations and financial condition.
We
may experience volatility in our stock price.
The
price
of our common stock has been, and may continue to be, highly volatile in
response to various factors, many of which are beyond our control, including:
·
|
developments
in the industries in which we operate;
|
·
|
actual
or anticipated variations in quarterly or annual operating results;
|
·
|
speculation
in the press or investment community; and
|
·
|
announcements
of technological innovations or new products by us or our competitors.
|
Our
common stock’s market price may also be affected by our inability to meet
analyst and investor expectations and failure to achieve projected financial
results. Any failure to meet such expectations or projected financial results,
even if minor, could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.
Volatility in our stock price may result in your inability to sell your shares
at or above the price at which you purchased them.
16
In
addition, stock markets have generally experienced a high level of price and
volume volatility, and the market prices of equity securities of many companies
have experienced wide price fluctuations not necessarily related to the
operating performance of such companies. These broad market fluctuations may
adversely affect our common stock’s market price. In the past, securities class
action lawsuits frequently have been instituted against such companies following
periods of volatility in the market price of such companies’ securities. If any
such litigation is instigated against us, it could result in substantial costs
and a diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could have a
material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial
condition.
We
are a defendant in several shareholder class-action
lawsuits.
We
and
certain of our officers were named as defendants in
purported class action complaints filed in the United States District Court
for
the Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division. The lead plaintiff in the
securities litigation seeks an unspecified amount of damages, premised on
allegations that each defendant made misrepresentations and omissions of
material fact during the class period in violation of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934. A summary of the securities litigation is set forth in Item 3
(Legal Proceedings) of this report. Although the Company believes that the
material allegations made in the amended complaint are without merit and intends
to vigorously defend the securities litigation, no assurances can be given
with
respect to the outcome of the securities litigation.
Anti-takeover
provisions in our articles of incorporation, our bylaws and provisions of
Florida law could delay or prevent a change of control that you
may
favor.
Our
articles of incorporation, our bylaws and provisions of Florida law could make
it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if doing so would be
beneficial to you. These provisions could discourage potential takeover attempts
and could adversely affect the market price of our shares. Because of these
provisions, you might not be able to receive a premium on your investment.
These
provisions include:
·
|
a
limitation on shareholders’ ability to call a special meeting of our
shareholders;
|
·
|
advance
notice requirements to nominate directors for election to our board
of
directors or to propose matters that can be acted on by shareholders
at
shareholder meetings;
|
·
|
our
classified board of directors, which means that approximately one-third
of
our directors are elected each year;
and
|
·
|
the
authority of the board of directors to issue, without shareholder
approval, preferred stock with such terms as the board of directors
may
determine.
|
The
provisions described above could delay or make more difficult transactions
involving a change in control of us, or our management.
Item
1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments.
|
We
had no
comments from the Securities and Exchange Commission staff regarding the
Company’s periodic or current reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
that were unresolved as of the date of filing of this report.
17
Item
2.
|
Properties.
|
The
Americas
The
Company’s headquarters are located in a leased building in Lake Mary, Florida
containing approximately 35,000 square feet. This facility houses the Company’s
U.S. production, research and development, administrative staff and customer
service/application operations. The Company’s U.S. sales and marketing
headquarters is in a leased building in Lake Mary, Florida consisting
approximately 8,200 square feet. Additionally, the Company has a leased facility
consisting of two buildings totaling approximately 37,000 square feet located
in
Kennett Square, Pennsylvania containing research and development, manufacturing
and service operations of the laser tracker product lines.
Europe/Africa
The
Company’s European headquarters are located in a leased building in Stuttgart,
Germany containing approximately 62,000 square feet. This facility houses the
manufacturing, administration, sales, marketing and service management personnel
for the Company’s European operations. Additionally the Company has a leased
facility consisting of approximately 16,000 square feet located in Schaffhausen,
Switzerland containing manufacturing operations for the Company’s products,
which are shipped to customers in Europe, Africa and Asia.
Asia/Pacific
The
Company’s Asian headquarters are located in a leased building in Singapore
containing approximately 22,000 square feet. This facility houses the
administration, sales, marketing, production and service management personnel
for the Company’s Asian operations. The Company’s Japan headquarters are located
in a leased building in Nagoya, Japan containing approximately 5,000 square
feet. This facility houses the Company’s Japan sales, marketing and service
operations. The Company’s China headquarters are located in a leased building in
Shanghai, China containing approximately 11,000 square feet for sales, marketing
and service operations.
The
Company believes that its current facilities will be adequate for its
foreseeable needs and that it will be able to locate suitable space for
additional regional offices or enhanced production needs as necessary.
The
information required by the remainder of this item is incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 99.1 attached hereto.
Item
3.
|
Legal
Proceedings.
|
Cimcore-Romer
Litigation -
On
November 25, 2003, Cimcore-Romer (now a division of Hexagon) filed a patent
infringement suit against us in the Federal District Court for the Southern
District of California alleging that certain of our products sold in the United
States, including the FARO Arm, infringe U.S. Patent 5,829,148 (‘148 patent).
The Company believes, and has contended in this litigation, that the Company
does not infringe the ‘148 patent and that the ‘148 patent is
invalid.
On
July
12, 2005, the court issued an order granting Cimcore-Romer’s motion for summary
judgment of infringement of three claims of the ‘148 patent. On July 22, 2005,
the Company announced its decision to limit the capability of its U.S.-based
FARO Arm products (the FARO Arm, the FARO Gage and the Digital Template) by
removing what we call the “infinite rotation feature” by reducing this
capability to 50 rotations or fewer. FARO believes that by limiting the range
of
the joint rotation to 50 rotations, it has removed from its U.S. products the
ability to sweep through an unlimited arc, which is a feature of the ‘148 patent
claims addressed by the court’s ruling required to infringe the ‘148 patent. The
revised products have not, however, been considered by the courts. Accordingly,
we cannot give assurance that the revised products will not be deemed to
infringe the ‘148 patent.
18
On
September 20, 2005, the Court vacated its order of summary judgment of
infringement and agreed to reconsider its conclusions from the patent claim
construction (“Markman”) ruling, which is a pretrial hearing often used in
patent infringement cases. The new Markman hearing occurred on October 3, 2005
and the hearing-on-summary judgments of infringement occurred on November 14,
2005. On October 18, 2005, the Court issued a revised claim construction that
the Company believes materially alters the Court’s previous Markman ruling by
substantially narrowing what FARO believes to be key aspects of the claim
construction. The Company believes that this narrower claim construction will
ultimately lead to a finding that it does not infringe any claim of the ‘148
patent. On November 14, 2005, the Court denied both the Plaintiffs’ Renewed
Motion for Summary Judgment of Infringement and the Defendant’s Faro’s Renewed
Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement, and determined that there
existed a genuine issue of material fact with respect to whether Faro infringed
the assert patent. The case was originally set for trial for January 31, 2006.
On January 18, 2006, the Court vacated the trial date and remanded the case
to
the magistrate for resumption of discovery regarding Plaintiffs’ alleged
compliance with the patent marking provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 287 and all related
issues. A hearing on Faro’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Regarding
Plaintiffs’ Failure to Comply With the Patent Marking Provisions of 35 U.S.C. §
287 was held on May 11, 2006. A new trial date has been set for July 17,
2006.
In
addition, the Company filed two separate requests for reexamination in the
U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) of the ‘148 Patent, both of which requests
were granted. The PTO ruled in the first reexamination in September 2005. The
Company believes that the PTO ruling bolsters the Company’s previous position
that it does not infringe the ‘148 patent. More specifically, in the first
reexamination, the PTO construed critical claim terms in a relatively narrow
manner, which the Company believes is consistent with its stated positions
in
the patent litigation. This narrow claim construction led the PTO to
differentiate the claims for the references at issue in the first reexamination.
The Company believes that this narrow construction, while allowing the ‘148
claims to be confirmed valid over the aforementioned references in the first
reexamination, will prevent the California District Court from ruling that
Faro’s products infringe the ‘148 patent. The Company’s second reexamination
request was granted by the PTO in November 2005 and is based on new “prior art”
(that is, earlier issued patent publications) submitted to the PTO which FARO
believes will ultimately invalidate the ‘148 patent. This prior art reference
was not at issue in the first reexamination proceeding. The PTO has not ruled
in
the second reexamination request.
In
the
event of an adverse ruling in the Cimcore-Romer litigation, however, we could
be
required to pay substantial damages, cease the manufacturing, use and sale
of
any infringing products, discontinue the use of certain processes or obtain
a
license, if available, from Cimcore-Romer with royalty payment obligations
by
us. An adverse decision in the Cimcore-Romer case could materially and adversely
affect our financial condition and results of operations. At this time, however,
the Company cannot estimate the potential impact, if any, that might result
from
this suit, and therefore, no provision has been made to cover such
expense.
Securities
Litigation -
On
December 6, 2005, the first of four essentially identical class action
securities fraud lawsuits were filed against the Company and certain officers
of
the Company (the “Securities Litigation”). On April 19, 2006, the four lawsuits
were consolidated, and Kornitzer Capital Management, Inc. was appointed as
the
lead plaintiff. On May 16, 2006, Kornitzer filed its Consolidated Amended Class
Action Complaint against the Company and the individual defendents. The amended
complaint also names Grant Thornton LLP, the Company’s independent registered
public accounting firm, as an additional defendant.
19
In
the
amended complaint, Kornitzer seeks to represent a class consisting of all
persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s publicly traded
securities between April 15, 2004 and March 15, 2006. On behalf of the alleged
class, Kornitzer seeks an unspecified amount of damages, premised on allegations
that each defendant made misrepresentations and omissions of material fact
during the class period in violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Among other things, Kornitzer alleges that the Company’s reported gross margins
and net income were knowingly overstated as a result of manipulation of the
Company’s inventory levels, that the Company failed to disclose deficiencies
associated with the Company’s implementation and use of its enterprise resource
planning system and material requirements planning system, made false and
misleading statements regarding the Company’s internal controls, failed to
disclose the fact that the Company was accruing commissions and bonuses which
would have a material, adverse effect upon the Company’s profitability, and
improperly reported sales and net income based, in part, on sales and new orders
obtained in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
The
Company’s deadline for filing its response to the amended complaint is July 31,
2006. The Company has timely notified the issuer of its Executive Liability
and
Entity Securities Liability insurance policy of the Securities Litigation,
and
has reserved the full amount of its $250,000 retention under the policy. The
Company intends to file a motion to dismiss. Although the Company believes
that
the material allegations made in the amended complaint are without merit and
intends to vigorously defend the Securities Litigation, no assurances can be
given with respect to the outcome of the Securities Litigation.
Voluntary
Disclosure of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Matter to the Securities and
Exchange Commissions and Department of Justice
- As
previously reported on the Company’s Form 8-K dated March 15, 2006, the Company
learned that its China subsidiary had made payments to certain customers in
China that may have violated the FCPA and other applicable laws. The Company’s
Audit Committee instituted an internal investigation into this matter in
February 2006, and the Company voluntarily notified the SEC and the DOJ of
this
matter in March 2006. The internal investigation into this matter has been
completed. The Company has provided to the SEC and the DOJ information obtained
during the course of this investigation and is cooperating with both agencies.
The
Company’s internal investigation has identified certain improper payments made
in China and deficiencies in its controls with respect to its operations in
China in possible violation of the FCPA. If the SEC or the DOJ determines that
violations of the FCPA have occurred, they could seek civil and criminal
sanctions, including monetary penalties, against the Company and/or certain
of
its employees, as well as additional changes to the Company’s business practices
and compliance programs. Based on current information, it is not possible to
predict at this time when the SEC or DOJ investigations will be resolved, what
the outcome will be, what sanctions, if any, will be imposed, or the effect
that
such matters may ultimately have on the Company or its consolidated financial
statements. Results of the investigation revealed that the referral fee payments
in possible violation of the FCPA were $165,000 and $265,000 in 2004 and
2005, respectively, which were recorded in selling expenses in the Company's
statement of income. The related sales to customers to which payment of
these referral fees had been made totaled approximately $1.3 million and $3.24
million in 2004 and 2005, respecively. Additional improper referral fee
payments of $122,000 were made in January and February 2006 related to sales
contracts in 2005. The Company anticipates incurring expenses of at
least $3.5 million in 2006 relating to its internal investigation of the FCPA
matter.
The
Company has terminated certain personnel in the Asia-Pacific Region and has
re-assigned the duties of other personnel in both the Asia-Pacific Region and
the U.S. as a result of the internal investigation. The Company is instituting
the following remedial measures:
· |
Contracted
with a third party forensics accounting team to conduct an in-depth
audit
of the operations in China and in other countries in the Asia-Pacific
region and to make recommendations for improvement to the internal
control
systems.
|
20
· |
Reviewing
third party distributor arrangements in an effort to assure that
all
contracts include adherence to the FCPA.
|
· |
Performing
due diligence on all third party distributors and implementing a
process
to assess potential new distributors.
|
· |
Established
an in-house internal audit function including hiring a Director of
Internal Audit.
|
· |
Consolidating
the human resources, financial accounting and reporting functions
for the
Asia region into the Singapore
Operations.
|
· |
Implemented
an internal certification process to ascertain whether similar issues
may
exist elsewhere in the Company.
|
· |
Implemented
a quarterly internal certification process to confirm adherence to
company
policy and all applicable laws and regulations that will include
all
regional leadership, country management and other sales
management.
|
· |
Implementing
additional training on FCPA and other matters for employees and a
confidential compliance reporting
system.
|
The
Company reported sales in China of $9.0 million in 2005 and $4.2 million in
2004, approximately 7% and 4% of total sales, respectively. Depending on how
this matter is resolved, the Company’s sales in China could be significantly
impacted. The termination of certain personnel and cessation of improper
payments in China may have a significant adverse effect on future operations
in
China because such action could negatively influence the decisions of a
significant number of customers of the Chinese subsidiary to do business with
that subsidiary. The potential magnitude of the loss of sales in China as a
result of potential violations of the FCPA cannot be estimated at this
time.
During
the Company’s internal investigation of its business practices in China, it
became aware that income taxes related to certain commissions and bonus payments
to its employees had not been properly reported. The Company will promptly
remit
any deficiencies after it has completed its investigation. At this time, the
Company does not anticipate the amount will have a material effect on its
financial condition or results of operations. The Company may be subject to
penalties by the Chinese tax authorities, but we are not able to determine
the
amount, if any, of the assessment.
Other
than the litigation mentioned above, the Company is not involved in any other
legal proceedings other than routine litigation arising in the normal course
of
business. The Company does not believe the results of such litigation, even
if
the outcome were unfavorable to the Company, would have a material adverse
effect on the Company’s business, financial condition or results of
operations.
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security
Holders.
|
No
matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter
of 2005.
21
PART
II
Item
5.
|
Market
For Registrant’s Common Equity and Related Stockholder
Matters.
|
The
Company’s common stock, par value $.001 per share, began trading on the NASDAQ
Stock Market in September 1997 under the symbol FARO. Before that date, there
was no established public trading market for the common stock. The following
table sets forth the high and low sale price of the Company’s common stock for
its two most recent fiscal years:
2005
|
2004
|
||||||||||||
High
|
Low
|
High
|
Low
|
||||||||||
First
Quarter
|
30.33
|
22.85
|
33.23
|
20.27
|
|||||||||
Second
Quarter
|
30.31
|
24.11
|
27.89
|
17.63
|
|||||||||
Third
Quarter
|
28.37
|
19.14
|
24.60
|
18.62
|
|||||||||
Fourth
Quarter
|
22.47
|
16.50
|
31.85
|
20.55
|
The
Company has not paid any cash dividends on its common stock to date. The payment
of dividends, if any, in the future is within the discretion of the Board of
Directors and will depend on the Company’s earnings, its capital requirements
and financial condition, and may be restricted by future credit arrangements
entered into by the Company. The Company expects to retain future earnings
for
use in operating and expanding its business and does not anticipate paying
any
cash dividends in the reasonably foreseeable future. As of June 19, 2006 the
last sale price of the Company’s common stock was $12.89, and there were 74
holders of record of common stock. The Company believes that there are a
significantly larger number of beneficial owners of its common
stock.
On
November 12, 2003, the Company sold 1,158,000 shares of its common stock, and
two of the Company’s founders sold 772,000 shares of the Company’s common stock
to institutional investors in a private placement that was not registered under
the Securities Act of 1933. The shares were sold for $21.50 per share, resulting
in total proceeds before placement agent fees and other offering expenses of
$24.9 million and $16.6 million to the Company and the co-founders,
respectively. The purchasers of the shares sold in the transaction were 31
institutional investors. Robert W. Baird & Co. served as the placement agent
for the transaction, and received a fee equal to $2,489,700, or 6% of the
aggregate sales proceeds. The Company also reimbursed Robert W. Baird & Co.
for $50,000 in expenses incurred in connection with the transaction. The
private placement transaction was exempt from registration under the Securities
Act of 1933, as amended, pursuant to section 4(2) thereof and Rule 506 under
Regulation D promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission there under.
These exemptions were available for the private placement transaction on the
basis that the transaction did not involve a public offering and satisfied
each
of the criteria under Rule 506 of Regulation D.
On
January 10, 2005, the Company filed a Registration
Statement on Form S-3 with the Securities and Exchange Commission allowing
it to
raise proceeds of up to $125 million. The proceeds from any offerings with
respect to this registration statement, if any, would be used for either
repayment or refinancing of debt, acquisition of additional businesses or
technologies or for working capital and general corporate purposes. To date,
we
have not raised any capital under this Form S-3 Registration Statement. The
Company must file in a timely manner all reports under the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934 (with certain exceptions) with the SEC for a period of
12
months in order to be able to use its S-3 registration
statement.
22
Item
6.
|
Selected
Financial Data.
|
Historical
- Year ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
in
thousands, except share and per-share data
|
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
2002
|
2001
|
||||||||||||||
Statement
of Operations Data:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Sales
|
$
|
125,590
|
$
|
97,020
|
$
|
71,786
|
$
|
46,246
|
$
|
36,122
|
|||||||||
Gross
profit
|
72,932
|
59,996
|
42,266
|
25,137
|
21,818
|
||||||||||||||
Income
(loss) from operations
|
10,226
|
14,584
|
7,440
|
(2,939
|
)
|
(3,362
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes
|
9,898
|
15,289
|
9,436
|
(1)
|
|
(1,805
|
)
|
(2,506
|
)
|
||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
8,179
|
14,931
|
8,278
|
(2,016
|
)
|
(2,848
|
)
|
||||||||||||
Net
income (loss) per common share:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.58
|
$
|
1.08
|
$
|
0.68
|
$
|
(0.17
|
)
|
$
|
(0.26
|
)
|
|||||||
Diluted
|
$
|
0.57
|
$
|
1.06
|
$
|
0.64
|
$
|
(0.17
|
)
|
$
|
(0.26
|
)
|
|||||||
Weighted
average common shares outstanding:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Basic
|
14,169,140
|
13,833,590
|
12,181,221
|
11,853,732
|
11,032,449
|
||||||||||||||
Diluted
|
14,442,248
|
14,023,159
|
12,845,992
|
11,853,732
|
11,032,449
|
||||||||||||||
|
Historical
- as at December 31,
|
||||||||||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
2002
|
2001
|
|||||||||||||||
Consolidated
Balance Sheet Data:
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Working
capital
|
$
|
64,619
|
$
|
65,686
|
$
|
51,368
|
$
|
18,339
|
$
|
22,303
|
|||||||||
Total
assets
|
122,648
|
105,078
|
81,914
|
45,195
|
39,654
|
||||||||||||||
Total
debt
|
340
|
250
|
107
|
1,556
|
81
|
||||||||||||||
Total
shareholders’ equity
|
98,860
|
89,158
|
68,921
|
33,384
|
32,336
|
||||||||||||||
(1)
Includes a favorable legal settlement of $1.1 million in other
income.
|
Item
7.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations.
|
The
following information should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated
Financial Statements of the Company, including the notes thereto, included
elsewhere in this document.
23
Overview
We
design, develop, manufacture, market and support portable, software driven,
3-D
measurement systems that are used in a broad range of manufacturing, industrial,
building construction and forensic applications. The Company’s Faro Arm, Faro
Scan Arm and Faro Gage articulated measuring devices, the Faro Laser Tracker,
and their companion CAM2 software, provide for Computer-Aided Design (CAD)-based
inspection and/or factory-level statistical process control. Together, these
products integrate the measurement, quality inspection, and reverse engineering
functions with CAD software to improve productivity, enhance product quality
and
decrease rework and scrap in the manufacturing process. The Company uses the
acronym “CAM2” for this process, which stands for computer-aided manufacturing
measurement. The Company’s Digital Template articulated measuring device and its
related software are used to measure the shape of existing counter tops and
other structures in residential or commercial buildings to provide the data
required to manufacture replacement countertops or other structures. The Digital
Template reduces the time required to measure these existing products and to
provide the data to manufacturing machines to create the replacement structures,
compared to traditional techniques. In March 2005 the Company acquired
iQvolution AG, a German designer, developer and manufacturer of a portable
laser-based device for measuring the detailed composition of factories, oil
refineries and other structures. This device and its related software, which
the
Company sells under the product name Laser Scanner LS also has forensic
applications such as capturing detailed 3-D crime scene information. As of
June
2006, the Company’s products have been purchased by approximately 4,900
customers worldwide, ranging from small machine shops to such large
manufacturing and industrial companies as Audi, Bell Helicopter, Boeing, British
Aerospace, Caterpillar, Daimler Chrysler, General Electric, General Motors,
Honda, Johnson Controls, Komatsu Dresser, Lockheed Martin, Nissan, Siemens
and
Volkswagen, among many others.
We
continue to pursue international markets. We established sales offices in France
and Germany in 1996, Great Britain in 1997, Japan and Spain in 2000, Italy
in
2001, and China in 2003. We opened sales offices in South Korea and India in
2004. We established sales offices in Poland, Netherlands, Malaysia, Vietnam,
and Singapore in 2005 and added a new regional headquarters in Singapore in
the
third quarter of 2005 along with a new manufacturing and service facility there
in the fourth quarter of 2005. In 2003 we began to manage and report our global
sales in three regions: the Americas, Europe/Africa and Asia/Pacific. In 2005,
44.5% of our sales were in the Americas compared to 43.0% in 2004, 35.7% were
in
the Europe/Africa region compared to 44.4% in 2004 and 19.7% were in the
Asia/Pacific region, compared to 12.6% in 2004 (see also Note 20 Geographic
Data
to the financial statements below).
We
derive
revenues primarily from the sale of our Faro Arm, Faro Scan Arm, Faro Gage,
Faro
Laser Tracker and Faro Laser Scanner LS 3-D measurement equipment, and their
related multi-faceted software. Revenue related to these products is recognized
upon shipment. In addition, we sell one and three-year extended warranties
and
training and technology consulting services relating to our products. We
recognize the revenue from extended warranties on a straight-line basis. We
also
receive royalties from licensing agreements for our historical medical
technology and generally recognize the revenue from these royalties as licensees
use the technology.
In
2003,
we began to manufacture our Faro Arm products in Switzerland for customer orders
from the Europe/Africa and Asia/Pacific regions. We began to manufacture our
Faro Gage product, and parts of our Faro Laser Tracker product in our Swiss
plant in the third quarter of 2004. We began complete production of the Faro
Laser Tracker product in our Swiss plant in 2005. We began to manufacture our
Faro Arm products in our Singapore plant in the fourth quarter of 2005 and
expect to begin production of our Faro Gage and Faro Laser Tracker there in
the
first half of 2006. We expect our Singapore plant will take over from our Swiss
plant in supplying our Asia/Pacific region’s needs for these products. The
manufacture of these products for customer orders from the Americas will be
done
in our manufacturing facilities located in Florida and Pennsylvania. Our Faro
Laser Scanner LS product is currently manufactured in our new German facility,
located in Stuttgart. We expect all our existing plants to have the production
capacity necessary to support our growth, at least through 2006.
As
previously reported on the Company’s Form 8-K dated March 15, 2006, the Company
learned that its China subsidiary had made payments to certain customers in
China that may have violated the FCPA and other applicable laws. The Company’s
Audit Committee instituted an internal investigation into this matter in
February 2006, and the Company voluntarily notified the SEC and the DOJ of
this
matter in March 2006. The internal investigation into this matter has been
completed. The Company has provided to the SEC and the DOJ information obtained
during the course of this investigation and is cooperating with both agencies.
24
The
Company’s internal investigation has identified certain improper payments
made in China and deficiencies in its controls with respect to its operations
in
China in possible violation of the FCPA. If the SEC or the DOJ determines that
violations of the FCPA have occurred, they could seek civil and criminal
sanctions, including monetary penalties, against the Company and/or certain
of
its employees, as well as additional changes to the Company’s business practices
and compliance programs. Based on current information, it is not possible to
predict at this time when the SEC or DOJ investigations will be resolved,
what the outcome will be, what sanctions, if any, will be imposed, or the effect
that such matters may ultimately have on the Company or its consolidated
financial statements. Results of the investigation revealed that the referral
fee payments in possible violation of the FCPA were $165,000 and $265,000
in 2004 and 2005, respectively, which were recorded in selling expenses in
the
Company's statement of income. The related sales to customers to which
payment of these referral fees had been made totaled approximately $1.3 million
and $3.24 million in 2004 and 2005, respecively. Additional improper
referral fee payments of $122,000 were made in January and February 2006 related
to sales contracts in 2005. The Company anticipates incurring
expenses of at least $3.5 million in 2006 relating to its internal investigation
of the FCPA matter.
The
Company has terminated certain personnel in the Asia-Pacific Region and has
re-assigned the duties of other personnel in both the Asia-Pacific Region and
the U.S. as a result of the internal investigation. The Company is instituting
the following remedial measures:
· |
Contracted
with a third party forensics accounting team to conduct an in-depth
audit
of the operations in China and in other countries in the Asia-Pacific
region and to make recommendations for improvement to the internal
control
systems.
|
· |
Reviewing
third party distributor arrangements in an effort to assure that
all
contracts include adherence to the FCPA.
|
· |
Performing
due diligence on all third party distributors and implementing a
process
to assess potential new distributors.
|
· |
Established
an in-house internal audit function including hiring a Director of
Internal Audit.
|
· |
Consolidating
the human resources, financial accounting and reporting functions
for the
Asia region into the Singapore
Operations.
|
· |
Implemented
an internal certification process to ascertain whether similar issues
may
exist elsewhere in the Company.
|
· |
Implemented
a quarterly internal certification process to confirm adherence to
company
policy and all applicable laws and regulations that will include
all
regional leadership, country management and other sales management.
|
· |
Implementing
additional training on FCPA and other matters for employees and a
confidential compliance reporting
system.
|
The
Company had sales in China of $9.0 million in 2005 and $4.2 million in 2004,
approximately 7% and 4% of total sales, respectively. Depending on how this
matter is resolved, the Company’s sales in China could be significantly
impacted. The termination of certain personnel and the cessation of improper
payments in China may have a significant adverse effect on future operations
in
China because such action could negatively influence the decisions of a
significant number of customers of the Chinese subsidiary to do business with
that subsidiary. The potential magnitude of the loss of sales in China as a
result of potential violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act cannot
be
estimated at this time.
25
During
the Company’s internal investigation of its business practices in China, it
became aware that income taxes related to certain commissions and bonus payments
to its employees had not been properly reported. The Company will promptly
remit
any deficiencies after it has completed its investigation. At this time, the
Company does not anticipate the amount will have a material effect on its
financial condition or results of operations. The Company may be subject to
penalties by the Chinese tax authorities, but we are not able to determine
the
amount, if any, of the assessment.
With
respect to the financial performance in 2005, cost of sales consists primarily
of material, production overhead and labor. Since our IPO in 1997, annual gross
margin has been in the range of 54%-64% of sales. Gross margin for fiscal 2005
was within that range at 58.1%.
Selling
expenses as a percentage of sales grew significantly in 2005 to 29.7% compared
to 26.7% in 2004. The higher percentage in 2005 was due to the addition of
new
sales personnel and related costs while the additional sales people become
fully
trained and productive.
General
and administrative expenses consist primarily of salaries for administrative
personnel, rent, utilities and professional and legal expenses. General and
administrative expenses were higher in 2005 due in part to an increase in
professional and legal expenses of approximately $2.0 million directly related
to increased patent litigation costs, compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley section
404
regarding internal controls and procedures and professional and legal fees
resulting from the internal investigation in China.
Research
and development expenses represent salaries, equipment and third-party services.
We have a commitment to support ongoing research and development and intend
to
continue to fund these efforts at the level of 5-7% of sales going
forward.
We
expect
to incur minimal expenses in 2006 as calculated under the Black-Scholes method
of SFAS 123, related to our adoption of SFAS 123(R) for the expensing of stock
options as we vested substantially all of our unvested options in the fourth
quarter of 2005. The reduction in pre-tax charges estimated by the Company
as a
result of the acceleration amounts to approximately $7.7 million over the course
of the original vesting periods. Options to purchase approximately 704,310
shares of the Company’s stock or 52.5% of the Company’s outstanding options were
accelerated. The weighted average exercise price of the options subject to
acceleration were $21.30. The aggregate pretax expense for the shares subject
to
acceleration that would have been reflected in the Company’s consolidated
financial statements beginning in 2006 is approximately $7.7 million, including
$4.3 million in 2006, $2.7 million in 2007, and $0.7 million in 2008. The fair
value for any future grants will be included in expense over the vesting
periods. These expenses will be apportioned according to the classification
of
the employees who have received stock options into cost of sales, selling,
general and administrative or research and development costs.
In
2005,
our worldwide effective tax rate was 17.4%. In 2004 we were able to use
previously reserved net operating loss carry-forwards, which combined with
our
release of $1.7 million in valuation allowance reduced our effective tax rate
to
2.3% for 2004. We have received a favorable income tax rate commitment from
the
Swiss government as an incentive to establish a manufacturing plant in
Switzerland, and in 2005 have entered into an agreement with the Singapore
Economic Development Board for a favorable multi-year income tax rate commitment
covering our Singapore headquarters and manufacturing operations. (See Critical
Accounting Policies - Income Taxes below).
Accounting
for wholly owned foreign subsidiaries is maintained in the currency of the
respective foreign jurisdiction and, therefore, fluctuations in exchange rates
may have an impact on inter-company accounts reflected in our consolidated
financial statements. We are aware of the availability of off-balance sheet
financial instruments to hedge exposure to foreign currency exchange rates,
including cross-currency swaps, forward contracts and foreign currency options
(see Foreign Exchange Exposure below). However, we do not regularly use such
instruments, and none were utilized in 2005, 2004, or 2003.
26
We
have
had fourteen consecutive profitable quarters through December 31, 2005. Our
sales growth and profitability has been a result of a number of factors,
including: the acquisition of SMX, which manufactured the predecessor to the
Faro Laser Tracker, the introduction in October 2002 of the latest generation
of
our traditional Faro Arm product, the introduction of the Faro Gage in September
2003, the introduction of our Faro Scan Arm product in 2004, and an increase
in
the number of sales people worldwide. Our worldwide sales and marketing
headcount in 2005, 2004 and 2003 was 289, 167, and 120,
respectively.
In
2003,
the Company recorded approximately $1.1 million in other income as a result
of
receiving approximately 100,000 shares of Company stock related to a positive
arbitration settlement between the Company and the former SMX shareholders.
On
November 12, 2003, we sold 1,158,000 shares of common stock to certain
institutional investors in a private placement. The shares were sold for $21.50
per share, resulting in total proceeds before placement agent fees and other
offering expenses of $24.9 million. This transaction significantly increased
our
cash available for a variety of potential uses including working capital,
acquisitions, capital expenditures and our ongoing international
expansion.
On
January 10, 2005, the Company filed a Registration Statement on Form S-3 with
the Securities and Exchange Commission allowing it to raise proceeds of up
to
$125 million. The proceeds from any offerings with respect to this registration
statement, if any, would be used for either repayment or refinancing of debt,
acquisition of additional businesses or technologies or for working capital
and
general corporate purposes. To date, we have not raised any capital under this
Form S-3 Registration Statement. The Company must file in a timely manner all
reports under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (with certain exceptions)
with the SEC for a period of 12 months in order to be able to use its S-3
registration statement. (See also Liquidity and Capital Resources
below).
27
Results
of Operations
The
following table sets forth, for the periods presented, the percentage of sales
represented by certain items in the Company’s consolidated statements of
income:
Years
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Statement
of Operations Data:
|
||||||||||
Sales
|
100.0
|
%
|
100.0
|
%
|
100.0
|
%
|
||||
Cost
of sales
|
41.9
|
%
|
38.2
|
%
|
41.1
|
%
|
||||
Gross
margin
|
58.1
|
%
|
61.8
|
%
|
58.9
|
%
|
||||
Operating
expenses:
|
||||||||||
Selling
|
29.7
|
%
|
26.7
|
%
|
25.6
|
%
|
||||
General
and administrative
|
12.4
|
%
|
12.1
|
%
|
13.7
|
%
|
||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
2.7
|
%
|
2.4
|
%
|
3.0
|
%
|
||||
Research
and development
|
5.1
|
%
|
5.6
|
%
|
6.3
|
%
|
||||
Total
operating expenses
|
49.9
|
%
|
46.8
|
%
|
48.5
|
%
|
||||
Income
from operations
|
8.2
|
%
|
15.0
|
%
|
10.4
|
%
|
||||
Interest
income
|
0.6
|
%
|
0.4
|
%
|
0.1
|
%
|
||||
Other
income, net
|
(0.6
|
%)
|
0.4
|
%
|
2.7
|
%
|
||||
Interest
expense
|
(0.1
|
%)
|
(0.0
|
%)
|
(0.1
|
%)
|
||||
Income
before income taxes
|
8.1
|
%
|
15.8
|
%
|
13.1
|
%
|
||||
Income
tax expense
|
1.5
|
%
|
0.4
|
%
|
1.6
|
%
|
||||
Net
income
|
6.6
|
%
|
15.4
|
%
|
11.5
|
%
|
2005
Compared to 2004
Sales.
Sales increased $28.6 million or 29.5% from $97.0 million for the
year ended December 31, 2004 to $125.6 million for the year ended December
31,
2005. This increase resulted from higher unit sales of the Faro Arm, Faro Laser
Tracker and Faro Gage products, the introduction of the Faro Laser Scanner
LS
and the effect of an overall increase in headcount in sales and marketing of
122, or 73.1% from 167 in 2004 to 289 in 2005. Geographically,
sales increased $14.1 million or 33.8% in the Americas, $1.8 million or 4.2%
in
Europe/Africa, and $12.6 million or 103.3% in the Asia/Pacific region. Our
sales
growth is driven to a large extent by the growth in the number of sales people
we have. We expect that new sales people will have a learning curve of 6-12
months. In 2005 our sales and marketing headcount increased 63.0% from 54 to
88
in the Americas, 53.9% from 76 to 117 in Europe/Africa, and 127.0% from 37
to 84
in the Asia/Pacific region. We cannot quantify the impact, if any, on future
sales in China resulting from actions taken to ensure compliance with all
applicable foreign and US regulations.
Gross
profit.
Gross profit increased $12.9 million or 21.5% from $60.0 million for
the year ended December 31, 2004 to $72.9 million for the year ended December
31, 2005. Gross margin decreased from 61.8% for the year ended December 31,
2004
to 58.1% for the year ended December 31, 2005 due primarily to product mix,
higher service costs and price discounts.
28
Selling
expenses.
Selling expenses increased by $11.4 million or 44.0%, from $25.9
million for the year ended December 31, 2004 to $37.3 million for the year
ended
December 31, 2005. This increase was a result of higher commissions related
to
increased volume of $3.1 million, higher salaries of $4.6 million related to
the
increase in sales and marketing personnel, higher product demonstration costs
of
$0.6 million and higher marketing costs of $3.1 million. As a percentage of
sales, selling expenses increased to 29.7% of sales in 2005 from 26.7% in 2004.
General
and administrative expenses.
General and administrative expenses increased by $3.8 million or
32.5% from $11.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 to $15.5 million
for the year ended December 31, 2005. This increase was due to higher salaries
and bonuses of $1.1 million, higher professional and legal fees of $2.7 million,
of which $1.3 million was related to patent litigation, and higher facilities
and rent of $0.6 million, partially offset by reduced stock option expense
of
$0.4 million. General and administrative expenses as percentage of sales rose
slightly to 12.4% of sales in 2005 from 12.1% of sales in 2004.
Depreciation
and amortization expenses.
Depreciation and amortization expenses increased by $1.2 million or
52.2% from $2.3 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 to $3.5 million
in
2005, due
to an
increase in depreciation of new equipment from our Asia/Pacific expansion and
from additions to our leased space in the U.S., and an increase in amortization
from our purchase of iQvolution.
Research
and development expenses.
Research and development expenses increased by $1.0 million or 18.5%
from $5.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 to $6.4 million for
the
year ended December 31, 2005. This was due to an increase in salaries and
bonuses of $0.6 million stemming from the hiring of personnel to support the
new
Laser Scanner LS and an increase in external services and other project expenses
of $0.2 million. Research and development expenses as a percentage of sales
were
5.1% in 2005 compared to 5.6% in 2004.
Interest
income / expense.
Interest income increased by $0.2 million or 50% from $0.4 million
for the year ended December 31, 2004 to $0.6 million for the year ended December
31, 2005 primarily from an increase in interest rates in 2005 which was
partially offset by reduced investment balances. Interest expense increased
slightly due to our purchase of iQvolution and subsequent retirement of their
debt obligations.
Other
(expense) income, net.
Other
(expense) income, net decreased by $1.2 million from income of $0.4 million
for
the year ended December 31, 2004 to expense of $0.8 million for the year ended
December 31, 2005. This decrease was primarily due to foreign exchange losses
of
$0.8 million in 2005.
Income
tax expense.
Income tax expense increased $1.3 million from $0.4 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004 to $1.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2005. The
effective tax rate in 2005 was 17.4% of income before income tax compared to
2.3% in 2004. The primary reason for the higher tax rate was the prior year
tax
benefit attributable to a reduction in the valuation allowance of approximately
$3.2 million. Of that reduction, $1.5 million related to usage of “net operating
losses” in foreign jurisdictions and $1.7 million of the reduction in the
valuation allowance related to the partial release of the valuation allowance
taken in the fourth quarter of 2004 on foreign deferred tax assets which the
Company believed were more likely than not to be realized. The Company has
$6.0
million in net deferred tax assets remaining, which will more likely than not
be
realized in 2006 and thereafter if the Company remains consistently profitable
(See also Note 14-Income Taxes). Separate from income tax expenses, the Company
recorded an addition to shareholders’ equity of $0.4 million in 2005 for the
income tax benefit received from the exercise of unqualified stock options
by
employees.
29
Net
income. Net
income decreased $6.7 million or 45.0% from $14.9 million for the year ended
December 31, 2004 to $8.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2005 as a
result of the factors described above.
2004
Compared to 2003
Sales.
Sales increased $25.2 million or 35.1% from $71.8 million for the
year ended December 31, 2003 to $97.0 million for year ended December 31, 2004.
This increase resulted from higher unit sales of the Faro Arm, Faro Laser
Tracker and Faro Gage products, and an overall increase in headcount in sales
and marketing of 47, or 39.2% from 120 in 2003 to 167 in 2004. Geographically,
sales increased $3.8 million or 10.0% in the Americas, $15.4 million or 55.6%
in
Europe/Africa, and $6.0 million or 96.8% in the Asia/Pacific region. Our sales
growth is driven to a large extent by the growth in the number of sales people
we have. We expect that new sales people will have a learning curve of 3-6
months before they are fully functional. In 2004 our sales and marketing
headcount increased 23% from 44 to 54 in the Americas, 13% from 67 to 76 in
Europe /Africa, and 311% from 9 to 37 in the Asia/Pacific region.
Gross
profit.
Gross profit increased $17.7 million or 41.8% from $42.3 million for
the year ended December 31, 2003 to $60.0 million for the year ended December
31, 2004. Gross margin increased from 58.9% for the year ended December 31,
2003
to 61.8% for the year ended December 31, 2004 due to reduced price discounts,
reduced service costs as a percentage of sales from 9.0% in 2003 to 8.5% in
2004, as a result of improvements in product quality and efficiencies in
production.
Selling
expenses.
Selling expenses increased by $7.6 million or 41.5%, from $18.3
million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $25.9 million for the year
ended
December 31, 2004. This increase was a result of higher commissions of $3.0
million, higher salaries and bonuses of $2.5 million related to the increase
in
sales and marketing personnel, higher product demonstration costs of $1.2
million and higher marketing costs of $0.9 million. As a percentage of sales,
selling expenses increased to 26.7% of sales in 2004 from 25.6% in 2003.
General
and administrative expenses.
General and administrative expenses increased by $1.9 million or
19.4% from $9.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $11.7 million
for the year ended December 31, 2004. This increase was due to higher salaries
and bonuses of $1.4 million, higher professional and legal fees of $0.8 million
and higher facilities and rent of $0.3 million, partially offset by reduced
stock option expense of $0.4 million. General and administrative expenses as
percentage of sales fell to 12.1% of sales in 2004 from 13.7% of sales in 2003.
In filings prior to Form 10-Q for the third quarter of 2004 we represented
the
cost of employee stock options as a separate line item in our consolidated
statements of income. In accordance with SEC Regulation S-X we have eliminated
the separate line item for all periods presented, and have included the cost
of
employee stock options in the appropriate expense category, according to each
employee’s function. Virtually all of the employees who had stock options that
gave rise to an expense were in administration. As a result, the $9.8 million
in
general and administration expenses for 2003 reported above is higher than
the
$9.1 million previously reported in our Form 10-K for 2003 by $0.7 million
in
employee stock option expense in 2003.
Depreciation
and amortization expenses.
Depreciation and amortization expenses increased by $0.2 million or
10.5% from $2.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $2.3 million
in
2004, due
to an
increase in depreciation of new equipment and capital leases.
Research
and development expenses.
Research and development expenses increased by $0.9 million or 20.2%
from $4.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $5.4 million for
the
year ended December 31, 2004. This was due to an increase in salaries and
bonuses of $0.7 million and an increase in external services and other project
expenses of $0.2 million. Research and development expenses as a percentage
of
sales were 5.6% in 2004 compared to 6.3% in 2003.
30
Interest
income / expense.
Interest income increased by $0.3 million or 334% from $0.1 million
for the year ended December 31, 2003 to $0.4 million for the year ended December
31, 2004 primarily from an increase in investments in 2004 related to the
proceeds from the Company’s sale of stock in November 2003 (see also
Overview
above
and Liquidity
and Capital Resources
below).
Interest expense decreased slightly for the year ended December 31, 2004 (See
Liquidity
and Capital Resources below).
Other
(expense) income, net.
Other
(expense) income, net decreased by $1.6 million from $2.0 million for the year
ended December 31, 2003 to $0.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2004.
This decrease was primarily due to a settlement of litigation with the former
shareholders of SMX for $1.1 million in 2003 (see also Note 2 - Acquisition)
and
a reduction in foreign exchange gains of $0.2 million in 2004.
Income
tax expense.
Income tax expense decreased $0.8 million from $1.2 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003 to $0.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2004. The
effective tax rate in 2004 was 2.3% of income before income tax compared to
12.3% in 2003. The primary reason for the lower than expected tax rate was
the
tax benefit attributable to a reduction in the valuation allowance of
approximately $3.2 million. Of that reduction, $1.5 million relates to usage
of
“net operating losses” in foreign jurisdictions and $1.7 million of the
reduction in the valuation allowance relates to the partial release of the
valuation allowance taken in the fourth quarter on foreign deferred tax assets
which the Company now believes are more likely than not to be realized. The
Company determined that the amount of deferred tax assets relating to the net
operating loss carryforwards of foreign subsidiaries was understated by
approximately $3.7 million at December 31, 2003. As these net operating loss
carryforwards were fully reserved at December 31, 2003 by a valuation allowance,
there is no income statement or balance sheet impact to be recognized for 2003.
The Company has $5.0 million in net deferred tax assets remaining, which will
more likely than not be realized in 2005 and thereafter if the Company remains
consistently profitable (See also Note 14-Income Taxes). Separate from income
tax expenses, the Company recorded an addition to shareholders’ equity of $2.4
million for the income tax benefit received from the exercise of unqualified
stock options by employees.
Net
income. Net
income increased $6.6 million or 79.5% from $8.3 million for the year ended
December 31, 2003 to $14.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2004 as
a
result of the factors described above.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
The
Company has financed its operations primarily from cash provided by operating
activities and from the proceeds of its 1997 initial public offering of common
stock (approximately $31.7 million), and its 2003 private placement of its
common stock with various institutional investors (approximately $24.9
million).
On
September 17, 2003, the Company entered into a loan agreement with SunTrust
Bank
for a line of credit of $5 million. This agreement, which bears interest at
the
rate of LIBOR plus 1.75%, was renewed in August 2005 and is due on demand.
The
Company has not drawn on this line of credit. The Company has received a term
sheet and is currently negotiating a new loan agreement which is expected to
increase the term to three years and increase the amount of the credit line
to
$30.0 million.
31
On
January 10, 2005, the Company filed a Registration Statement on Form S-3 with
the Securities and Exchange Commission allowing it to raise proceeds of up
to
$125 million. The proceeds from any offerings with respect to this registration
statement, if any, would be used for either repayment or refinancing of debt,
acquisition of additional businesses or technologies or for working capital
and
general corporate purposes.
Cash
and
cash equivalents at December 31, 2005 were $9.3 million, compared to $16.4
million at December 31, 2004. The decrease of $7.1 million was primarily
attributable to changes in operating assets and liabilities of $14.6 million,
cash used for the purchase of iQvolution of $6.4 million and cash used for
the
purchase of property and equipment and payments for intangible assets of $4.9
million. This was offset by net income of $8.2 million, non-cash charges of
$2.9
million, net proceeds from sales of investments of $6.0 million, proceeds of
$0.4 million from employee stock plan activity and the effect of exchange rate
changes on cash of $1.2 million.
We
believe that our working capital, together with anticipated cash flow from
our
operations, our credit facility and previously announced shelf registration
will
be sufficient to fund our liquidity requirements through 2006.
Off
Balance Sheet Items
The
Company is not party to any off-balance sheet items that have not already been
appropriately disclosed in these financial statements.
Contractual
Obligations and Commercial Commitments
The
Company is party to capital leases on automotive and other equipment with an
initial term of 36 to 60 months and other non-cancelable operating leases,
including leases with related parties that expire on or before 2010. These
obligations are presented below as of December 31, 2005:
Payments
Due by Period
|
||||||||||||||||
Contractual
Obligations
|
Total
|
<
1 Year
|
1-3
Years
|
3-5
Years
|
>
5 Years
|
|||||||||||
Capital
lease obligations
|
$
|
227
|
$
|
119
|
$
|
104
|
$
|
4
|
$
|
-
|
||||||
Operating
lease obligations
|
7,263
|
2,257
|
3,318
|
1,688
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Purchase
obligations
|
8,044
|
8,044
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Total
|
$
|
15,534
|
$
|
10,420
|
$
|
3,422
|
$
|
1,692
|
$
|
-
|
The
Company enters into purchase commitments for products and services in the
ordinary course of business. These purchases generally cover production
requirements for 60 to 90 days. On August 11, 2005, FARO entered into an
agreement with DELCAM plc under which the Company agreed to purchase
approximately $1.4 million in products over a 12-month term. At December 31,
2005, the Company had completed the purchase of $0.6 million in products under
this agreement. Effective November 1, 2005, FARO entered into an agreement
with
Metrologic Group S.A. under which the Company agreed to purchase approximately
$0.4 million in products over a 12-month term. At December 31, 2005, no products
had been purchased under this agreement. Other than the agreements listed above,
the Company does not have any long-term commitments for purchases.
Critical
Accounting Policies
In
response to the SEC’s financial reporting release, FR-60, “Cautionary
Advice Regarding Disclosure About Critical Accounting
Policies,”
we have
selected our critical accounting policies for purposes of explaining the
methodology used in the calculation in addition to any inherent uncertainties
pertaining to the possible effects on our financial condition. The critical
policies discussed below are our processes of recognizing revenue, the reserve
for obsolescence, income taxes, and the reserve for warranties. These policies
affect current assets and operating results and are therefore critical in
assessing our financial and operating status. These policies involve certain
assumptions that, if incorrect, could create an adverse impact on our operations
and financial position.
32
Revenue
Recognition
Revenue
related to the Company’s measurement systems (integrated combinations of a
measurement device, a computer and software loaded on the computer and the
measurement device) is recognized upon shipment as the Company considers the
earnings process substantially complete as of the shipping date. The Company
warrants its products against defects in design, materials and workmanship
for
one year. A provision for estimated future costs relating to warranty expenses
is recorded when products are shipped. The Company separately sells one and
three year extended warranties. Extended warranty revenues are recognized on
a
straight-line basis over the term of the warranty. Costs relating to extended
maintenance plans are recognized as incurred. Revenue from sales of software
only is recognized when no further significant production, modification or
customization of the software is required and when the following criteria are
met: persuasive evidence of a sales agreement exists, delivery has occurred,
and
the sales price is fixed or determinable and deemed collectible. Revenues
resulting from sales of comprehensive support, training and technology
consulting services are recognized as such services are performed and are
deferred when billed in advance of the performance of services. Revenue from
the
licensing agreements for the use of its technology for medical applications
is
generally recognized as licensees use the technology. Amounts representing
royalties for the current year and not received as of year-end are estimated
as
due based on historical data and recognized in the current year.
The
Reserve for Excess and Obsolete Inventory
Since
the
amount of inventoriable cost that we will recoup through sales cannot be known
with exact certainty, we rely upon both past sales experience and future sales
forecasts. Inventory is considered obsolete if we have withdrawn those products
from the market or if we had no sales of the product for the past 12 months,
and
have no sales forecasted for the next 12 months. Inventory is considered excess
if the quantity on hand exceeds one year of remaining usage. The resulting
obsolete and excess parts are then reviewed to determine if a substitute usage
or a future need exists. Items without an identified current or future usage
will be reserved for in an amount equal to 100% of the average FIFO cost of
such
inventory.
Income
Taxes
We
review
our deferred tax assets on a regular basis to evaluate their recoverability
based upon expected future reversals of deferred tax liabilities, projections
of
future taxable income, and tax planning strategies that we might employ to
utilize such assets, including net operating loss carryforwards. Based on the
positive and negative evidence described in Financial Accounting Standards
Board
(FASB) Statement No. 109, “Accounting
for Income Taxes”
(SFAS
109), we establish a valuation allowance against the net deferred assets of
a
taxing jurisdiction in which we operate unless it is “more likely than not” that
we will recover such assets through the above means. In the future, our
evaluation of the need for the valuation allowance will be significantly
influenced by our ability to achieve profitability and our ability to predict
and achieve future projections of taxable income.
33
The
Company operates in a number of different countries around the world. In 2003,
the Company began to manufacture its products in Switzerland, where it has
received a favorable income tax rate commitment from the Swiss government as
an
incentive to establish a manufacturing plant there. In 2005, the Company opened
a regional headquarters and began to manufacture its products in Singapore,
where it has received a favorable multi-year income tax rate commitment from
the
Singapore Economic Development Board as an incentive to establish a
manufacturing plant and regional headquarters there.
Significant
judgment is required in determining our worldwide provision for income taxes.
In
the ordinary course of global business, there are many transactions for which
the ultimate tax outcome is uncertain. We have appropriately reserved for our
tax uncertainties based on the criteria established by SFAS 5, “Accounting
for Loss Contingencies.”
The
Reserve for Warranties
The
Company establishes a liability for included twelve-month warranties by the
creation of a warranty reserve, which is an estimate of the repair expenses
likely to be incurred for the remaining period of warranty measured in
installation-months in each major product group. Warranty reserve is reflected
in accrued liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The
warranty expense is estimated by determining the total repair expenses for
each
product group in the period and determining a rate of repair expense per
installation month. The rate is multiplied by the number of machine-months
of
warranty for each product group sold during the period to determine the
provision for warranty expenses for the period. The Company reevaluates its
exposure to warranty costs at the end of each period using the estimated expense
per installation month for each major product group, the number of machines
remaining under warranty and the remaining number of months each machine will
be
under warranty. While such expenses have historically been within its
expectations, we cannot guarantee this will continue in the future.
Transactions
with Related and Other Parties
The
Company leases its headquarters in Lake Mary, Florida from Xenon Research,
Inc.,
all of the issued and outstanding capital stock of which is owned by Simon
Raab,
the Company’s Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer, and Diana Raab, his
spouse. The term of the lease expired on February 28, 2006, and is continuing
on
a month to month basis. The Company expects to renew the lease for an additional
3 - 5 years under similar terms. Base rent under the lease is $398,000
per
year.
Foreign
Exchange Exposure
We
conduct a significant portion of our business outside the United States. At
present, approximately 50% of our revenues are invoiced, and a significant
portion of our operating expenses paid, in foreign currencies. Fluctuations
in
exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and such foreign currencies may have
a
material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial
condition, and could specifically result in foreign exchange gains and losses.
The impact of future exchange rate fluctuations on the results of our operations
cannot be accurately predicted. To the extent that the percentage of our
non-U.S. dollar revenues derived from international sales increases (or
decreases) in the future, our exposure to risks associated with fluctuations
in
foreign exchange rates may increase (or decrease).
Inflation
The
Company believes that inflation has not had a material impact on its results
of
operations in recent years and does not expect inflation to have a material
impact on its operations in 2006.
34
Impact
of Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In
January 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued and
subsequently revised in December 2003, FIN 46, “Consolidation
of Variable Interest Entities” (FIN
46).
This
interpretation of ARB No. 51, “Consolidated
Financial Statements,”
addresses consolidation by business enterprises of variable interest entities.
Under current practice, two enterprises generally have been included in
consolidated financial statements because one enterprise controls the other
through voting interests. FIN 46 defines the concept of “variable interests” and
requires existing unconsolidated variable interest entities to be consolidated
by their primary beneficiaries if the entities do not effectively disperse
the
risks among the parties involved. FIN 46 applied immediately to variable
interest entities created after January 31, 2003, and to variable interest
entities in which an enterprise obtains an interest after that date. It applied
to the first fiscal year or interim period beginning after June 15, 2003, to
variable interest entities in which an enterprise holds a variable interest
that
it acquired before February 1, 2003. FIN 46(R) deferred the effective date
of
FIN 46 to the first reporting period ending after December 15, 2003. If it
is
reasonably possible that an enterprise will consolidate or disclose information
about a variable interest entity when this interpretation becomes effective,
the
enterprise shall disclose information about those entities in all financial
statements issued after January 31, 2003. FIN 46 may be applied prospectively
with a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the date on which it is first applied
or by restating previously issued financial statements for one or more years
with a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the beginning of the first year
restated. The Company has determined that it is not party to any variable
interest entities.
In
November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, “Inventory
Costs, an Amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4.”
SFAS No.
151 retains the general principle of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, “Inventory
Pricing,”
that
inventories are presumed to be stated at cost; however, it amends ARB No. 43
to
clarify that abnormal amounts of idle facilities, freight, handling costs and
spoilage should be recognized as current period expenses. Also, SFAS No. 151
requires fixed overhead costs be allocated to inventories based on normal
production capacity. The guidance in SAFS No. 151 is effective for inventory
costs incurred during fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005. The Company
believes that implementing SFAS No. 151 will not have a material impact on
its
financial position or results of operations.
In
December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R, “Share-Based
Payment.”
SFAS No.
123R requires employee stock options and rights to purchase shares under stock
participation plans to be accounted for under the fair value method, and
eliminates the ability to account for these instruments under the intrinsic
value method prescribed by APB Opinion No. 25, as allowed under the original
provisions of SFAS No. 123. SFAS No. 123R requires the use of an option pricing
model for estimating fair value, which is amortized to expense over the service
periods. SFAS No. 123R allows for two alternative transition methods. The first
method is the modified prospective application whereby compensation cost for
the
portion of awards for which the requisite service has not yet been rendered
that
are outstanding as of the adoption date will be recognized over the remaining
service period. The compensation cost for that portion of awards will be based
on the grant date fair value of those awards as calculated for pro forma
disclosures under SFAS No. 123, as originally issued. All new awards and awards
that are modified, repurchased, or cancelled after the adoption date will be
accounted for under the provisions of SFAS No. 123R. The second method is the
modified retrospective application, which requires that the Company restates
prior period financial statements. The modified retrospective application may
be
applied either to all periods or only to prior interim periods in the year
of
adoption of this statement. The Company will adopt the provisions of SFAS No.
123R effective January 1, 2006 using the modified prospective application
transition method. The Company accelerated the vesting for substantially all
of
its outstanding options prior to December 31, 2005, and expects to record
minimal expenses for its remaining unvested stock options during 2006. The
reduction in pre-tax charges estimated by the Company as a result of the
acceleration amounts to approximately $7.7 million over the course of the
original vesting periods. The fair value for any future grants will be included
in expense over the vesting periods.
35
ITEM
7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk.
|
Foreign
Exchange Exposure
The
Company conducts a significant portion of its business outside the United
States. At present, a slight majority of the Company’s revenues are invoiced,
and a significant portion of its operating expenses paid, in foreign currencies.
Fluctuations in exchange rates between the U.S. dollar and such foreign
currencies may have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, results
of operations and financial condition, and could specifically result in foreign
exchange gains and losses. The impact of future exchange rate fluctuations
on
the results of the Company’s operations cannot be accurately predicted. To the
extent that the percentage of the Company’s non-U.S. dollar revenues derived
from international sales increases in the future, the Company’s exposure to
risks associated with fluctuations in foreign exchange rates will increase
further.
Inflation
The
Company believes that inflation has not had a material impact on its results
of
operations in recent years and does not expect inflation to have a material
impact on its operations in 2006.
36
Item
8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary
Data.
|
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To
the
Board of Directors and Shareholders of FARO Technologies, Inc.:
We
have
audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of FARO Technologies,
Inc.
(a Florida Corporation) and subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”) as of
December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of income,
shareholders’ equity and cash flows for the years then ended. These financial
statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based
on
our audits.
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 FARO Technologies, Inc.
and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the results of their
operations and their cash flows for the years then ended in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America.
We
also
have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting
Oversight Board (United States), the effectiveness of FARO Technologies, Inc.
and subsidiaries internal control over financial reporting as of December
31, 2005, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission
(COSO) and our report dated June 21, 2006 expressed an unqualified opinion
on
management's assessment of internal controls over financial reporting and an
adverse opinion on the Company's internal controls over financial
reporting.
Our
audits were conducted for the purpose of forming
an opinion on the basic financial statements taken as a whole. Schedule
II – Valuation and Qualifying Accounts is presented for purposes of
addtional analysis and is not a required part of the basic financial statements.
This schedule has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the
audit
of the basic financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in
all
material respects to the basic financial statements taken as a
whole.
/s/
GRANT
THORNTON LLP
Orlando,
Florida
June
21,
2006
37
REPORT
OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM
To
the
Board of Directors and Shareholders of FARO Technologies, Inc.:
We
have
audited the accompanying consolidated statement of income, shareholders’ equity,
and cash flows of FARO Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) for
the
year ended December 31, 2003. These financial statements are the responsibility
of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
these financial statements based on our 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. We were not engaged to perform
an
audit of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Our audit
included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis
for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but
not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the
Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no
such opinion. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In
our
opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all
material respects, the consolidated results of the Company’s operations and cash
flows for the year ended December 31, 2003, in conformity with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles.
/s/
ERNST
& YOUNG LLP
Orlando,
Florida
February
20, 2004
38
FARO
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|||||||
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
|
|||||||
December
31,
|
December
31,
|
||||||
(in
thousands, except share data)
|
2005
|
2004
|
|||||
ASSETS
|
|||||||
Current
Assets:
|
|||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$
|
9,278
|
$
|
16,357
|
|||
Short-term
investments
|
16,490
|
22,485
|
|||||
Accounts
receivable, net
|
28,654
|
22,484
|
|||||
Inventories
|
28,650
|
16,378
|
|||||
Deferred
income taxes, net
|
2,155
|
744
|
|||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
2,200
|
2,538
|
|||||
Total
current assets
|
87,427
|
80,986
|
|||||
Property
and Equipment:
|
|||||||
Machinery
and equipment
|
6,940
|
4,352
|
|||||
Furniture
and fixtures
|
3,334
|
2,394
|
|||||
Leasehold
improvements
|
1,710
|
910
|
|||||
Property
and equipment at cost
|
11,984
|
7,656
|
|||||
Less:
accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
(5,920
|
)
|
(3,641
|
)
|
|||
Property
and equipment, net
|
6,064
|
4,015
|
|||||
Goodwill
|
14,574
|
8,077
|
|||||
Intangible
assets, net
|
6,395
|
3,568
|
|||||
Service
inventory
|
4,333
|
4,159
|
|||||
Deferred
income taxes, net
|
3,855
|
4,273
|
|||||
Total
Assets
|
$
|
122,648
|
$
|
105,078
|
|||
LIABILITIES
AND SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|||||||
Current
Liabilities:
|
|||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$
|
12,301
|
$
|
4,736
|
|||
Accrued
liabilities
|
5,569
|
7,252
|
|||||
Income
taxes payable
|
1,406
|
104
|
|||||
Current
portion of unearned service revenues
|
3,168
|
2,663
|
|||||
Customer
deposits
|
201
|
441
|
|||||
Current
portion of long-term debt and obligations under capital
leases
|
163
|
104
|
|||||
Total
current liabilities
|
22,808
|
15,300
|
|||||
Unearned
service revenues - less current portion
|
803
|
474
|
|||||
Long-term
debt and obligations under capital leases - less current
portion
|
177
|
146
|
|||||
Total
Liabilities
|
23,788
|
15,920
|
|||||
Commitments
and contingencies - See notes 11 and 16
|
|||||||
Shareholders'
Equity:
|
|||||||
Common
stock - par value $.001, 50,000,000 shares authorized; 14,481,178
and
14,004,092
issued;
14,290,917 and 13,964,092 outstanding, respectively
|
14
|
14
|
|||||
Additional
paid-in-capital
|
83,792
|
78,282
|
|||||
Deferred
compensation
|
148
|
505
|
|||||
Retained
earnings
|
17,256
|
9,077
|
|||||
Accumulated
other comprehensive (loss) income
|
(2,199
|
)
|
1,431
|
||||
Common
stock in treasury, at cost - 40,000 shares
|
(151
|
)
|
(151
|
)
|
|||
Total
Shareholders' Equity
|
98,860
|
89,158
|
|||||
Total
Liabilities and Shareholders' Equity
|
$
|
122,648
|
$
|
105,078
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
39
FARO
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
||||||||||
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME
|
||||||||||
Years
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
(in
thousands, except share and per share data)
|
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
|||||||
SALES
|
$
|
125,590
|
$
|
97,020
|
$
|
71,786
|
||||
COST
OF SALES (exclusive of depreciation and amortization, shown separately
below)
|
52,658
|
37,025
|
29,520
|
|||||||
Gross
profit
|
72,932
|
59,995
|
42,266
|
|||||||
OPERATING
EXPENSES:
|
||||||||||
Selling
|
37,274
|
25,887
|
18,342
|
|||||||
General
and administrative
|
15,539
|
11,745
|
9,835
|
|||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
3,453
|
2,339
|
2,119
|
|||||||
Research
and development
|
6,440
|
5,441
|
4,530
|
|||||||
Total
operating expenses
|
62,706
|
45,412
|
34,826
|
|||||||
INCOME
FROM OPERATIONS
|
10,226
|
14,583
|
7,440
|
|||||||
OTHER
INCOME (EXPENSE)
|
||||||||||
Interest
income
|
567
|
356
|
82
|
|||||||
Other
(expense) income, net
|
(806
|
)
|
362
|
1,960
|
||||||
Interest
expense
|
(89
|
)
|
(12
|
)
|
(46
|
)
|
||||
INCOME
BEFORE INCOME TAX
|
9,898
|
15,289
|
9,436
|
|||||||
INCOME
TAX EXPENSE
|
1,719
|
358
|
1,158
|
|||||||
NET
INCOME
|
$
|
8,179
|
$
|
14,931
|
$
|
8,278
|
||||
NET
INCOME PER SHARE - BASIC
|
$
|
0.58
|
$
|
1.08
|
$
|
0.68
|
||||
NET
INCOME PER SHARE - DILUTED
|
$
|
0.57
|
$
|
1.06
|
$
|
0.64
|
||||
Weighted
average shares - Basic
|
14,169,140
|
13,833,590
|
12,181,221
|
|||||||
Weighted
average shares - Diluted
|
14,442,248
|
14,023,159
|
12,845,992
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
40
FARO
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
FARO
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Accumulated
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additonal
|
Retained
|
Other
|
Common
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Common
Stock
|
Paid-in
|
Deferred
|
Earnings
|
Comprehensive
|
Stock
in
|
||||||||||||||||||||
(in
thousands, except share data)
|
Shares
|
Amounts
|
Capital
|
Compensation
|
(Deficit)
|
(Loss)
Income
|
Treasury
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||||||
BALANCE
DECEMBER 31, 2002
|
11,931,726
|
$
|
12
|
$
|
49,463
|
$
|
(15
|
)
|
$
|
(14,132
|
)
|
$
|
(1,794
|
)
|
$
|
(151
|
)
|
$
|
33,383
|
||||||
Net
income
|
8,278
|
8,278
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Currency
translation adjustment, net of tax
|
1,800
|
1,800
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive
income
|
10,078
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options
subject to variable accounting
|
931
|
(931
|
)
|
-
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of unearned compensation
|
719
|
719
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
option exercised
|
528,839
|
1
|
1,300
|
1,301
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Settlement
of SMX arbitration settled in stock
|
(99,567
|
)
|
(1,156
|
)
|
(1,156
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Tax
benefit from employee stock option exercises
|
1,420
|
1,420
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of common stock, net of expenses
|
1,158,000
|
1
|
23,175
|
23,176
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
BALANCE
DECEMBER 31, 2003
|
13,518,998
|
$
|
14
|
$
|
75,133
|
$
|
(227
|
)
|
$
|
(5,854
|
)
|
$
|
6
|
$
|
(151
|
)
|
$
|
68,921
|
|||||||
Net
income
|
14,931
|
14,931
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Currency
translation adjustment, net of tax
|
1,425
|
1,425
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive
income
|
16,356
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options
subject to variable accounting
|
(455
|
)
|
455
|
-
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of unearned compensation
|
277
|
277
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
option exercised
|
485,512
|
1,171
|
1,171
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Tax
benefit from employee stock option exercises
|
2,434
|
2,434
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cancellation
of SMX shares
|
(418
|
)
|
(1
|
)
|
(1
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||
BALANCE
DECEMBER 31, 2004
|
14,004,092
|
$
|
14
|
$
|
78,282
|
$
|
505
|
$
|
9,077
|
$
|
1,431
|
$
|
(151
|
)
|
$
|
89,158
|
|||||||||
Net
income
|
8,179
|
8,179
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Currency
translation adjustment, net of tax
|
(3,630
|
)
|
(3,630
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive
income
|
4,549
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options
subject to variable accounting
|
207
|
(207
|
)
|
-
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of unearned compensation
|
(150
|
)
|
(150
|
)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Amortization
of restricted stock units
|
93
|
93
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Accrual
for iQvolution milestone earn-outs
|
675
|
675
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
issued for iQvolution milestone earn-outs
|
12,183
|
252
|
252
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
options exercised
|
137,499
|
340
|
340
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Tax
benefit from employee stock option exercises
|
382
|
382
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock
issued for iQvolution purchase
|
152,292
|
3,499
|
3,499
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
Board
compensation
|
24,851
|
62
|
62
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
BALANCE
DECEMBER 31, 2005
|
14,330,917
|
$
|
14
|
$
|
83,792
|
$
|
148
|
$
|
17,256
|
$
|
(2,199
|
)
|
$
|
(151
|
)
|
$
|
98,860
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
41
FARO
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
|
||||||||||
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
||||||||||
Year
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
(in
thousands)
|
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
|||||||
CASH
FLOWS FROM:
|
||||||||||
OPERATING
ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||||
Net
income
|
$
|
8,179
|
$
|
14,931
|
$
|
8,278
|
||||
Adjustments
to reconcile net income to net cash (used in)
|
||||||||||
provided
by operating activities:
|
||||||||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
3,453
|
2,339
|
2,119
|
|||||||
Settlement
of SMX arbitration received in stock
|
-
|
-
|
(1,156
|
)
|
||||||
Provision
for bad debts
|
112
|
154
|
140
|
|||||||
Income
tax benefit from exercise of stock options
|
382
|
2,434
|
1,420
|
|||||||
Deferred
income taxes
|
(854
|
)
|
(3,309
|
)
|
(1,709
|
)
|
||||
Employee
stock plans (income) expense
|
(57
|
)
|
277
|
719
|
||||||
Change
in operating assets and liabilities:
|
||||||||||
Decrease
(increase) in:
|
||||||||||
Accounts
receivable, net
|
(7,830
|
)
|
(5,474
|
)
|
(898
|
)
|
||||
Inventories
|
(13,788
|
)
|
(5,354
|
)
|
(4,996
|
)
|
||||
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
508
|
(1,019
|
)
|
(229
|
)
|
|||||
Increase
(decrease) in:
|
||||||||||
Accounts
payable and accrued liabilities
|
4,309
|
2,138
|
961
|
|||||||
Income
taxes payable
|
1,454
|
(502
|
)
|
(321
|
)
|
|||||
Customer
deposits
|
(302
|
)
|
69
|
245
|
||||||
Unearned
service revenues
|
1,030
|
611
|
102
|
|||||||
Net
cash (used in) provided by operating activities
|
(3,404
|
)
|
7,295
|
4,675
|
||||||
INVESTING
ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||||
Acquisition
of iQvolution
|
(6,385
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
Purchases
of property and equipment
|
(3,937
|
)
|
(2,451
|
)
|
(1,430
|
)
|
||||
Payments
for intangible assets
|
(937
|
)
|
(1,004
|
)
|
(868
|
)
|
||||
Proceeds
from repayment of notes receivable
|
-
|
-
|
1,240
|
|||||||
Purchases
of short-term investments
|
(10,900
|
)
|
(30,390
|
)
|
(15,847
|
)
|
||||
Proceeds
from short-term investments
|
16,895
|
23,942
|
1,675
|
|||||||
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
(5,264
|
)
|
(9,903
|
)
|
(15,230
|
)
|
||||
FINANCING
ACTIVITIES:
|
||||||||||
Payments
on line of credit, capital leases and long-term debt
|
(34
|
)
|
(38
|
)
|
(1,459
|
)
|
||||
Proceeds
from issuance of stock, net
|
402
|
1,171
|
24,478
|
|||||||
Net
cash provided by financing activities
|
368
|
1,133
|
23,019
|
|||||||
EFFECT
OF EXCHANGE RATE CHANGES ON CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
1,221
|
407
|
937
|
|||||||
(DECREASE)
INCREASE IN CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
|
(7,079
|
)
|
(1,068
|
)
|
13,401
|
|||||
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF PERIOD
|
16,357
|
17,425
|
4,024
|
|||||||
CASH
AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF PERIOD
|
$
|
9,278
|
$
|
16,357
|
$
|
17,425
|
The
accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial
statements.
42
FARO
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEARS
ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2005, 2004 and 2003
(in
thousands, except share and per share data, or as otherwise noted)
1. SUMMARY
OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Description
of Business— FARO
Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries (collectively the “Company” or “FARO”)
design, develop, manufacture, market and support software-based
three-dimensional measurement devices for manufacturing, industrial, building
construction and forensic applications. The Company’s principal products include
the Faro Arm, Faro Scan Arm, Digital Template and Faro Gage, all articulated
electromechanical measuring devices, and the Faro Laser Tracker and the Faro
Laser Scanner LS, both laser-based measuring devices. Markets for the Company’s
products include automobile, aerospace, heavy equipment, countertop
manufacturers and law enforcement agencies. The Company sells the vast majority
of its products though a direct sales force located in many of the world’s
largest industrialized countries.
Principles
of Consolidation—The
consolidated financial statements of the Company include the accounts of FARO
Technologies, Inc. and all its subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions
and
balances have been eliminated. The financial statements of the foreign
subsidiaries are translated into U.S. dollars using exchange rates in effect
at
period-end for assets and liabilities and average exchange rates during each
reporting period for results of operations. Adjustments resulting from financial
statement translations are reflected as a separate component of accumulated
other comprehensive (loss) income.
Revenue
Recognition, Product Warranty and Extended Maintenance
Contracts—Revenue
related to the Company’s measurement systems (integrated combinations of a
measurement device, a computer and software loaded on the computer and the
measurement device) is recognized upon shipment as the Company considers the
earnings process substantially complete as of the shipping date. The Company
warrants its products against defects in design, materials and workmanship
for
one year. A provision for estimated future costs relating to warranty expenses
is recorded when products are shipped. The Company separately sells one and
three year extended warranties. Extended warranty revenues are recognized on
a
straight-line basis over the term of the warranty. Costs relating to extended
maintenance plans are recognized as incurred. Revenue from sales of software
only is recognized when no further significant production, modification or
customization of the software is required and when the following criteria are
met: persuasive evidence of a sales agreement exists, delivery has occurred,
and
the sales price is fixed or determinable and deemed collectible. Revenues
resulting from sales of comprehensive support, training and technology
consulting services are recognized as such services are performed and are
deferred when billed in advance of the performance of services. Revenue from
the
licensing agreements for the use of its technology for medical applications
is
generally recognized as licensees use the technology. Amounts representing
royalties for the current year and not received as of year-end are estimated
as
due based on historical data and recognized in the current year.
Cash
and Cash Equivalents—The
Company considers cash on hand and amounts on deposit with financial
institutions which have maturities of three months or less when purchased to
be
cash and cash equivalents. The Company had deposits with foreign banks totaling
$7,336 and $14,044 as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Short-term
investments—Short-term
investments ordinarily consist of short-term debt securities acquired with
cash
not immediately needed in operations, and are held at fair value.
43
Management
determines the appropriate classification of its short-term investments at
the
time of the purchase and reevaluates such determinations at each balance sheet
date. The Company’s short-term investments are diversified among high credit
quality securities in accordance with the Company’s investment policy.
Accounts
receivable and related allowance for doubtful accounts—Credit
is
extended to customers based on an evaluation of a customer’s financial condition
and, generally, collateral is not required. Accounts receivable are generally
due within 30-90 days and are stated at amounts due from customers net of an
allowance for doubtful accounts. Accounts outstanding longer than the
contractual payment terms are considered past due. The Company makes judgments
as to the collectibility of accounts receivable based on historical trends
and
future expectations. Management estimates an allowance for doubtful accounts
which adjusts gross trade accounts receivable to its net realizable value.
The
allowance for doubtful accounts is based on an analysis of all receivables
for
possible impairment issues, and historical write-off percentages. The Company
writes off accounts receivable when they become uncollectible, and payments
subsequently received on such receivables are credited to the allowance for
doubtful accounts. The Company does not generally charge interest on past due
receivables.
Inventories—Inventories
are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value using the first-in
first-out method. Shipping and handling costs are classified as a component
of
cost of sales in the consolidated statements of income. Sales demonstration
inventory is comprised of measuring devices utilized by sales representatives
to
present the Company’s products to customers. These products remain in sales
demonstration inventory for six to twelve months and are subsequently sold
at
prices that produce slightly reduced gross margins. Service inventory is
comprised of inventory that is not expected to be sold within twelve months,
such as training and loaned equipment. During the second quarter of 2005, the
Company changed its method of computing the pricing of inventory from average
cost to FIFO. This change was made as a result of an inventory system
conversion, to allow for improved system efficiencies. The underlying
calculation between average cost and FIFO cost is not materially different.
This
change did not have a material impact on the results of operations for the
fiscal 2005 total year.
Property
and Equipment—Property
and equipment purchases exceeding a thousand dollars are capitalized and
recorded at cost. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over
the estimated useful lives of the various classes of assets as follows:
Machinery
and equipment
|
|
2
to 5 years
|
Furniture
and fixtures
|
|
3
to 10 years
|
Leasehold
improvements are amortized on the straight-line basis over the lesser of the
life of the asset or the term of the lease, not to exceed 7 years.
Depreciation
expense was $2,154, $1,453 and $1,132 in 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
Accelerated methods of depreciation are used for income tax purposes in contrast
to book purposes, and as a result, appropriate provisions are made for the
related deferred income taxes.
Goodwill
and Intangibles—
Goodwill represents the excess cost of a business acquisition over the fair
value of the net assets acquired. In accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 142, “Goodwill
and Other Intangible Assets,”
indefinite-life identifiable intangible assets and goodwill are not amortized.
The Company periodically reviews its identifiable intangible assets and
goodwill, considering factors such as projected cash flows and revenue and
earnings multiples, to determine whether the value of the assets are impaired
and the amortization periods are appropriate. If an asset is impaired, the
difference between the value of the asset reflected on the financial statements
and its current fair value is recognized as an expense in the period in which
the impairment occurs.
44
Other
acquired intangibles principally include core technology, existing product
technology and customer relationships that arose in connection with the
acquisition of CATS GmbH and iQvolution AG (See note 2). Other acquired
intangibles are recorded at fair value at the date of acquisition and are
amortized over their estimated useful lives of 3 to 15 years.
Patents
are recorded at cost. Amortization is computed using the straight-line method
over the lives of the patents.
Research
and Development—Research
and development costs incurred in the discovery of new knowledge and the
resulting translation of this new knowledge into plans and designs for new
products, prior to the attainment of the related products’ technological
feasibility, are recorded as expenses in the period incurred.
The
Reserve for Warranties
- The
Company establishes a liability for included twelve-month warranties by the
creation of a warranty reserve, which is an estimate of the repair expenses
likely to be incurred for the remaining period of warranty measured in
installation-months in each major product group. Warranty reserve is reflected
in accrued liabilities in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The
warranty expense is estimated by determining the total repair expenses for
each
product group in the period and determining a rate of repair expense per
installation month. The rate is multiplied by the number of machine-months
of
warranty for each product group sold during the period to determine the
provision for warranty expenses for the period. The Company reevaluates its
exposure to warranty costs at the end of each period using the estimated expense
per installation month for each major product group, the number of machines
remaining under warranty and the remaining number of months each machine will
be
under warranty. While such expenses have historically been within its
expectations, we cannot guarantee this will continue in the future.
Income
Taxes—
We
review our deferred tax assets on a regular basis to evaluate their
recoverability based upon expected future reversals of deferred tax liabilities,
projections of future taxable income, and tax planning strategies that we might
employ to utilize such assets, including net operating loss carryforwards.
Based
on the positive and negative evidence described in Financial Accounting
Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 109, “Accounting
for Income Taxes”
(SFAS
109), we establish a valuation allowance against the net deferred assets of
a
taxing jurisdiction in which we operate unless it is “more likely than not” that
we will recover such assets through the above means. In the future, our
evaluation of the need for the valuation allowance will be significantly
influenced by our ability to achieve profitability and our ability to predict
and achieve future projections of taxable income.
The
Company operates in a number of different countries around the world. In 2003,
the Company began to manufacture its products in Switzerland, where it has
received a permanent income tax rate commitment from the Swiss government as
an
incentive to establish a manufacturing plant there. In 2005, the Company opened
a regional headquarters and began to manufacture its products in Singapore,
where it has received a favorable multi-year income tax rate commitment from
the
Singapore Economic Development Board as an incentive to establish a
manufacturing plant and regional headquarters there.
Significant
judgment is required in determining our worldwide provision for income taxes.
In
the ordinary course of global business, there are many transactions for which
the ultimate tax outcome is uncertain. We have appropriately reserved for our
tax uncertainties based on the criteria established by SFAS 5, “Accounting
for Loss Contingencies.”
45
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments—The
Company’s financial instruments include cash and cash equivalents, short-term
investments, accounts receivable and accounts payable and accruals. The carrying
amounts of such financial instruments approximate their fair value due to the
short-term nature of these instruments.
Earnings
Per Share—Basic
earnings per share (EPS) is computed by dividing earnings available to common
shareholders by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for
the
period. Diluted EPS includes the effect of all dilutive stock options and equity
instruments. A reconciliation of the number of common shares used in calculation
of basic and diluted EPS is presented in Note 18.
Concentration
of Credit Risk—Financial
instruments which potentially expose the Company to concentrations of credit
risk consist principally of short-term investments and operating demand deposit
accounts. The Company’s policy is to place its operating demand deposit accounts
with high credit quality financial institutions.
Stock-Based
Compensation— In
December 2002, the FASB issued SFAS No. 148, “Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation-Transition and Disclosure.”
SFAS No.
148 provides alternative methods of transition for a voluntary change to the
fair value based method of accounting for stock-based compensation. In addition,
SFAS No. 148 amends the disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 123, “Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation,” to require prominent disclosures in both annual and
interim financial statements about the method of accounting for stock-based
compensation and the effect of the method used on reported results. SFAS No.
148
is effective for financial statements for fiscal years ending after December
15,
2002 and for interim periods beginning after December 15, 2002. The annual
disclosure requirements of SFAS No. 148 were adopted by the Company on January
1, 2003.
In
accordance with SFAS No. 123, the Company has elected to continue to account
for
its employee stock compensation plans using the intrinsic value based method
with pro-forma disclosures of net earnings and earnings per share, as if the
fair value based method of accounting defined in SFAS No. 123 had been applied.
Under the intrinsic value based method, compensation cost is measured by the
excess, if any, of the quoted market price of the stock at the grant date over
the amount an employee must pay to acquire the stock. Under the fair value
based
method, compensation cost is measured at the grant date based on the fair value
of the award and is recognized over the service period, which is usually the
vesting period. Included in net income are certain compensation expenses subject
to variable accounting treatment.
Had
compensation cost for the Company’s stock-based compensation plans been
determined consistent with SFAS No. 123, the Company’s net income and earnings
per share would have been as follows:
46
Years
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
|
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
|||||||
Net
income, as reported
|
$
|
8,179
|
$
|
14,931
|
$
|
8,278
|
||||
(Deduct)
Add: Stock-based employee compensation (income) expense included
in
reported net income, net of related tax effects
|
(94
|
)
|
173
|
448
|
||||||
Deduct:
Total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under
fair
value based method for all awards, net of related tax
effects
|
(7,468
|
)
|
(1,358
|
)
|
(317
|
)
|
||||
Pro
forma net income
|
$
|
617
|
$
|
13,746
|
$
|
8,409
|
||||
Earnings
per share:
|
||||||||||
Basic
- as reported
|
$
|
0.58
|
$
|
1.08
|
$
|
0.68
|
||||
Basic
- pro forma
|
$
|
0.04
|
$
|
0.99
|
$
|
0.69
|
||||
Diluted
- as reported
|
$
|
0.57
|
$
|
1.06
|
$
|
0.64
|
||||
Diluted
- pro forma
|
$
|
0.04
|
$
|
0.98
|
$
|
0.65
|
||||
|
||||||||||
*The
years ended 2005, 2004, and 2003 assume a U.S. tax rate of
37.6%.
|
The
Company used the Black-Scholes option-pricing model to determine the fair value
of grants made. The following assumptions were applied in determining the pro
forma compensation cost:
Years
Ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Risk-free
interest rate
|
3.30%
to 4.47
|
%
|
2.54%
to 3.82
|
%
|
2.48%
to 3.43
|
%
|
||||
Expected
dividend yield
|
0
|
%
|
0
|
%
|
0
|
%
|
||||
Expected
option life
|
4
years
|
5
years
|
3
- 10 years
|
|||||||
Stock
price volatility
|
62.7
|
%
|
80.5
|
%
|
74.20
|
%
|
Long-Lived
Assets—Effective
January 1, 2002, the Company adopted SFAS No. 144, “Accounting
for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets.”
SFAS No.
144 supersedes SFAS No. 121 and requires that one accounting impairment model
be
used for long-lived assets to be held and used and to be disposed of by sale,
whether previously held and used or newly acquired, and broadens the
presentation of discontinued operations to include more disposal transactions.
The adoption of SFAS No. 144 had no financial impact on the results of
operations or financial position of the Company. During the fourth quarter
of
2005, management reviewed the Company’s long-lived assets and concluded that
there was no impairment of these assets for the year ended December 31,
2005.
47
Estimates—The
preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted 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 revenues and expenses
during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Impact
of Recently Issued Accounting Standards
In
January 2003, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued and
subsequently revised in December of 2003, FIN 46, “Consolidation
of Variable Interest Entities.”
This
interpretation of ARB No. 51, “Consolidated
Financial Statements,”
addresses consolidation by business enterprises of variable interest entities.
Under current practice, two enterprises generally have been included in
consolidated financial statements because one enterprise controls the other
through voting interests. FIN 46 defines the concept of “variable interests” and
requires existing unconsolidated variable interest entities to be consolidated
by their primary beneficiaries if the entities do not effectively disperse
the
risks among the parties involved. FIN 46 applied immediately to variable
interest entities created after January 31, 2003, and to variable interest
entities in which an enterprise obtains an interest after that date. It applied
in the first fiscal year or interim period beginning after June 15, 2003, to
variable interest entities in which an enterprise holds a variable interest
that
it acquired before February 1, 2003. FIN 46(R) deferred the effective date
of
FIN 46 to the first reporting period ending after December 15, 2003. If it
is
reasonably possible that an enterprise will consolidate or disclose information
about a variable interest entity when this interpretation becomes effective,
the
enterprise shall disclose information about those entities in all financial
statements issued after January 31, 2003. FIN 46 may be applied prospectively
with a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the date on which it is first applied
or by restating previously issued financial statements for one or more years
with a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the beginning of the first year
restated. The Company has determined that it is not party to any variable
interest entities.
In
November 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 151, “Inventory
Costs, an Amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4.”
SFAS No.
151 retains the general principle of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4, “Inventory
Pricing,”
that
inventories are presumed to be stated at cost; however, it amends ARB No. 43
to
clarify that abnormal amounts of idle facilities, freight, handling costs and
spoilage should be recognized as current period expenses. Also, SFAS No. 151
requires fixed overhead costs be allocated to inventories based on normal
production capacity. The guidance in SFAS No. 151 is effective for inventory
costs incurred during fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005. The Company
believes that implementing SFAS No. 151 will not have a material impact on
its
financial position or results of operations.
In
December 2004, the FASB issued SFAS No. 123R, “Share-Based
Payment.”
SFAS No.
123R requires employee stock options and rights to purchase shares under stock
participation plans to be accounted for under the fair value method, and
eliminates the ability to account for these instruments under the intrinsic
value method prescribed by APB Opinion No. 25, as allowed under the original
provisions of SFAS No. 123. SFAS No. 123R requires the use of an option pricing
model for estimating fair value, which is amortized to expense over the service
periods. SFAS No. 123R allows for two alternative transition methods. The first
method is the modified prospective application whereby compensation cost for
the
portion of awards for which the requisite service has not yet been rendered
that
are outstanding as of the adoption date will be recognized over the remaining
service period. The compensation cost for that portion of awards will be based
on the grant date fair value of those awards as calculated for pro forma
disclosures under SFAS No. 123, as originally issued. All new awards and awards
that are modified, repurchased, or cancelled after the adoption date will be
accounted for under the provisions of SFAS No. 123R. The second method is the
modified retrospective application, which requires that the Company restates
prior period financial statements. The modified retrospective application may
be
applied either to all periods or only to prior interim periods in the year
of
adoption of this statement. The Company will adopt the provisions of SFAS No.
123R effective January 1, 2006 using the modified prospective application
transition method.
48
The
Company accelerated the vesting for substantially all of its outstanding options
prior to December 31, 2005, and expects to record minimal expenses for its
remaining unvested stock options during 2006. The reduction in pre-tax charges
estimated by the Company as a result of the acceleration amounts to
approximately $7.7 million over the course of the original vesting periods.
Options to purchase approximately 704,310 shares of the Company’s stock or 52.5%
of the Company’s outstanding options were accelerated. The weighted average
exercise price of the options subject to acceleration were $21.30. The aggregate
pretax expense for the shares subject to acceleration that would have been
reflected in the Company’s consolidated financial statements beginning in 2006
is approximately $7.7 million, including $4.3 million in 2006, $2.7 million
in
2007, and $0.7 million in 2008. The fair value for any future grants will be
included in expense over the vesting periods. These expenses will be apportioned
according to the classification of the employees who have received stock options
into cost of sales, selling, general and administrative or research and
development costs. The fair value for any future grants will be included in
expense over the vesting periods.
Reclassification
-
Certain
2004 and 2003 amounts have been reclassified to conform with the 2005
presentation.
2. ACQUISITION
iQvolution
-
On March
29, 2005, the Company acquired 100% of the outstanding stock of privately held
iQvolution AG (“iQvolution”). iQvolution, a German company, designs,
manufactures and supplies three-dimensional laser scanning products and
services. This purchase was a strategic acquisition to enable the Company to
enter broader three-dimensional measurement markets. The purchase price for
the
transaction was approximately $13.6 million, including an initial cash payment
of approximately $3.8 million and 314,736 shares of common stock valued at
approximately $7.2 million based on the average closing price for the three
days
immediately preceding the closing, 152,292 shares of which were payable
immediately. The remaining 162,444 shares of common stock, valued at
approximately $3.7 million, were placed in escrow and may be paid over the
following five years subject to achieving predetermined milestones with respect
to purchased assets. Subsequent to the purchase, approximately $1.8 million
in
cash was paid out for the repayment of loans and approximately $0.4 million
was
paid in fees associated with the purchase. Additionally, the purchase price
was
adjusted downward by $0.1 million, and these funds were repaid to the Company
in
the third quarter relating to the settlement of a purchase price adjustment
clause within the purchase agreement. In the fourth quarter of 2005, 12,183
shares were issued as a result of the successful qualification of milestones,
with a corresponding addition to goodwill of $252. At December 31, 2005, there
were 150,261 shares being held in escrow. In February of 2006, 43,871 shares
were issued as a result of milestones being met, for which $675 was accrued
into
goodwill and additional paid-in capital at December 31, 2005. An additional
1,288 shares were returned to the Company in February 2006 for cancellation
as a
result of milestone disqualification.
During
the third quarter, approximately $3.8 million of the purchase price was
allocated to intangible assets reflecting the Company’s preliminary estimate of
the fair value of technology and software assets acquired. The hardware assets
acquired were valued at approximately $2.3 million with an estimated life of
17
years, while the software assets were valued at approximately $1.6 million
with
an estimated life of 10 years. As of December 31, 2005, these estimates were
in
the process of being reviewed and validated by a third party. The current
purchase price and the allocation between goodwill and intangible assets is
subject to adjustment before the March 29, 2006 deadline based on the Company’s
completion of the purchase accounting for this transaction. The Company
completed in the first quarter of 2006 the third party valuation of the assets
acquired. The allocation between goodwill and intangible assets was recorded
in
the first quarter of 2006 and was not materially different from the preliminary
estimates. A preliminary beginning balance sheet for iQvolution follows below,
as adjusted for purchase accounting items through December 31, 2005.
49
Assets:
|
||||
Accounts
receivable
|
$
|
361
|
||
Inventories
|
280
|
|||
Prepaids
|
266
|
|||
Fixed
assets
|
595
|
|||
Deferred
tax assets
|
141
|
|||
Intangible
assets
|
3,840
|
|||
Goodwill
|
6,803
|
|||
Total
Assets
|
$
|
12,286
|
||
Liabilities
|
||||
Accounts
payable and accruals
|
$
|
2,235
|
||
Long-term
debt
|
167
|
|||
Total
Liabilities
|
$
|
2,402
|
The
operating results of iQvolution have been
included in the consolidated statements of income since the date of acquisition.
The following unaudited pro-forma results of operations for the years ended
December 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004 are presented for informational purposes
only and do not purport to be indicative of the results of operations which
actually would have resulted had the acquisition occurred on the date indicated,
or the results of operations which may result in the future.
Year
ended
|
|||||||
(unaudited)
|
Dec
31, 2005
|
Dec
31, 2004
|
|||||
Revenues
|
$
|
125,961
|
$
|
103,022
|
|||
Net
income
|
$
|
7,463
|
$
|
13,891
|
|||
Income
per share:
|
|||||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.53
|
$
|
0.99
|
|||
Diluted
|
$
|
0.52
|
$
|
0.98
|
SpatialMetrix
- On
January 16, 2002, the Company acquired SpatialMetriX Corporation (SMX). In
2003
the Company recorded approximately $1.1 million in other (expense) income,
net
in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations as a result of
receiving approximately 100,000 shares of Company stock related to a positive
arbitration settlement between the Company and the former SMX
shareholders.
50
3. SUPPLEMENTAL
CASH FLOW INFORMATION
Selected
cash payments and non-cash activities were as follows:
Years
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Cash
paid for interest
|
$
|
91
|
$
|
12
|
$
|
47
|
||||
Cash
paid for income taxes
|
2,027
|
357
|
1,526
|
|||||||
Cash
received from income tax refund
|
1,161
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Non-cash
investing and financing activities:
|
||||||||||
Value
of shares issued for acquisition of iQvolution
|
3,756
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||
Fixed
assets acquired under capital lease obligations
|
-
|
317
|
61
|
|||||||
Retirement
of fully depreciated property and equipment
|
-
|
4,016
|
-
|
4.
ALLOWANCE FOR DOUBTFUL ACCOUNTS
The
allowance for doubtful accounts is as follows:
Years
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Balance,
beginning of year
|
$
|
339
|
$
|
255
|
$
|
852
|
||||
Provision
|
112
|
154
|
140
|
|||||||
Amounts
written off, net of recoveries
|
(237
|
)
|
(70
|
)
|
(737
|
)
|
||||
Balance,
end of year
|
$
|
214
|
$
|
339
|
$
|
255
|
5.
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS
The
underlying investments of the Company’s variable rate municipal bonds are long
term tax-exempt municipal bonds. These variable rate municipal bonds mature
every seven days, at which time the interest rate adjusts to current market
conditions. As they are considered available-for-sale securities, the Company
has classified them as short-term investments on the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets.
6. INVENTORIES
Inventories
consist of the following:
December
31,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Raw
materials
|
$
|
11,621
|
$
|
6,620
|
|||
Work-in-process
|
199
|
428
|
|||||
Finished
goods
|
4,976
|
1,424
|
|||||
Sales
Demonstration Inventory
|
12,227
|
8,097
|
|||||
Reserve
for Obsolescence
|
(373
|
)
|
(191
|
)
|
|||
Inventory
|
28,650
|
16,378
|
|||||
Service
Inventory
|
4,333
|
4,159
|
|||||
Total
|
$
|
32,983
|
$
|
20,537
|
51
7. GOODWILL
The
Company’s goodwill at December 31, 2005 and 2004 is related to its acquisition
of three previous businesses. The Company tests for goodwill impairment in
accordance with SFAS No. 142, “Goodwill
and Other Intangible Assets.”
The
Company evaluates each reporting unit’s fair value versus its carrying value in
the fourth quarter of each year or more frequently if events or changes in
circumstances indicate that the carrying value may exceed the fair value. When
estimating the reporting unit’s fair value, the Company utilizes gross profit
for each reporting unit and a multiple based on industry averages for each
reporting unit and compares this against the carrying value. Impairments to
goodwill are charged against earnings in the period the impairment is
identified. The Company has three reporting units for which goodwill was tested
on December 31, 2005. As of December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company did not
have
any goodwill that was identified as impaired. The increase in goodwill of $6.6
million in 2005 relates primarily to the purchase of iQvolution while the $0.1
million increase in 2004 relates entirely to the translation of foreign currency
balances.
8. INTANGIBLE
ASSETS
Intangible
assets consist of the following:
December
31,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Amortizable
intangible assets:
|
|||||||
Existing
product technology
|
$
|
8,767
|
$
|
6,616
|
|||
Patents
|
2,544
|
2,625
|
|||||
Other
|
5,755
|
5,855
|
|||||
Total
|
17,066
|
15,096
|
|||||
Accumulated
amortization
|
(10,921
|
)
|
(11,778
|
)
|
|||
Total
amortizable intangible assets, net
|
6,145
|
3,318
|
|||||
Non-amortizable
intangible assets:
|
|||||||
Customer
lists
|
250
|
250
|
|||||
Intangible
assets - net
|
$
|
6,395
|
$
|
3,568
|
In
2005,
the Company wrote off patents with an original cost of $503 and a net book
value
of $334 which had been abandoned. Amortization expense was $1,299, $886 and
$987,
in
2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively. The estimated amortization expense for
each
of the five succeeding fiscal years is as follows:
Years
ending December 31,
|
Amount
|
|||
2006
|
$
|
1,268
|
||
2007
|
412
|
|||
2008
|
387
|
|||
2009
|
387
|
|||
2010
|
387
|
|||
Thereafter
|
3,304
|
|||
$
|
6,145
|
52
9. ACCRUED
LIABILITIES
Accrued
Liabilities consist of the following:
As
of
|
As
of
|
||||||
Apr.1,
2006
|
Dec.
31, 2005
|
||||||
Accrued
compensation and benefits
|
$
|
2,641
|
$
|
3,046
|
|||
Accrued
warranties
|
861
|
565
|
|||||
Professional
and legal fees
|
1,239
|
930
|
|||||
Other
accrued liabilities
|
828
|
2,711
|
|||||
$
|
5,569
|
$
|
7,252
|
Activity
related to accrued warranties was as follows:
December
31,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Beginning
Balance
|
$
|
565
|
$
|
590
|
|||
Provision
for warranty expense
|
1,050
|
740
|
|||||
Warranty
expired
|
(754
|
)
|
(765
|
)
|
|||
Ending
Balance
|
$
|
861
|
$
|
565
|
10. LINE
OF CREDIT
The
Company has an available line of credit of $5 million. Terms of this line of
credit require the Company to maintain certain ratios and balances with respect
to a debt covenant agreement, including current ratio, consolidated EBITDA,
indebtedness to consolidated net worth, fixed charge coverage ratio and
consolidated tangible net worth. As of December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company
was in compliance with the required ratios. Drawings under the line of credit
bear interest at a rate equivalent to LIBOR plus 1.75%. The line of credit
is
due on demand. There were no amounts outstanding under the line of credit at
December 31, 2005 or 2004.
The
Company has received a term sheet and is currently negotiating a new loan
agreement which is expected to increase the term to three years and increase
the
amount of the credit line to $30.0 million.
53
11. CAPITAL
LEASES AND LONG-TERM DEBT
Required
future payments of obligations under capital leases
are as
follows:
Capital
|
||||
Lease
|
||||
Year
ending December 31,
|
Obligations
|
|||
2006
|
$
|
124
|
||
2007
|
70
|
|||
2008
|
39
|
|||
2008
|
4
|
|||
2009
|
2
|
|||
Total
future minimum lease payments
|
239
|
|||
Less
- Amounts representing interest
|
(11
|
)
|
||
Total
obligations
|
228
|
|||
Less
- Current maturities
|
(119
|
)
|
||
$
|
109
|
Assets
under capital leases were $384 and $406 at December 31, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. Accumulated depreciation under capital leases was $235 and $178
at
December 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Long-term
debt of $112 is included in capital leases and long-term debt in the
accompanying consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2005. $44 of the
long-term debt is due in 2006, with the balance of $68 being due in
2007.
12. RELATED
PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Related
party lease—The
Company leases its plant and office building from Xenon Research, Inc., all
of
the issued and outstanding capital stock of which is owned by Simon Raab, our
Chairman and Co-Chief Executive Officer, and Diana Raab, his spouse.
The
term
of the lease expired
on
February 28, 2006, and is continuing on a month to month basis. The Company
expects to renew the lease for an additional 3 - 5 years under similar
terms.
Rent
expense under this lease was approximately
$398 in 2005, 2004 and 2003. The Company has determined that the assets subject
to this lease are not subject to the requirements of FIN 46(R).
Related
party loans—In
May
1998, the Company acquired CATS. On June 20, 2000 the Company and each of the
former CATS shareholders entered into an Amended and Restated Loan Agreement
pursuant to which the Company granted loans to the former CATS shareholders
in
the aggregate amount of $1.1 million (The Loans). The Loans outstanding were
for
a term of three years, at an interest rate of approximately 4.7%, and granted
the borrowers an option to extend the term for an additional three years. The
loans were repaid to the Company in 2003.
54
13. OTHER
(EXPENSE) INCOME, NET
Other
(expense) income, net consists of the following:
Years
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Foreign
exchange (losses) gains
|
$
|
(794
|
)
|
$
|
337
|
$
|
490
|
|||
Disposal
of patents
|
(334
|
)
|
-
|
-
|
||||||
Litigation
settlement
|
-
|
-
|
1,156
|
|||||||
Other
|
322
|
25
|
314
|
|||||||
Total
other (expense) income, net
|
$
|
(806
|
)
|
$
|
362
|
$
|
1,960
|
14. INCOME
TAXES
Income
before income taxes consists of the following:
Years
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Domestic
|
$
|
5,304
|
$
|
5,729
|
$
|
6,455
|
||||
Foreign
|
4,594
|
9,560
|
2,981
|
|||||||
Income
before income taxes
|
$
|
9,898
|
$
|
15,289
|
$
|
9,436
|
The
components of the income tax expense are as follows:
Years
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Current:
|
||||||||||
Federal
|
$
|
1,792
|
$
|
987
|
$
|
1,535
|
||||
State
|
173
|
65
|
101
|
|||||||
Foreign
|
1,317
|
1,316
|
572
|
|||||||
3,282
|
2,368
|
2,208
|
||||||||
Deferred:
|
||||||||||
Federal
|
(395
|
)
|
(278
|
)
|
(985
|
)
|
||||
State
|
(38
|
)
|
(18
|
)
|
(65
|
)
|
||||
Foreign
|
(1,130
|
)
|
(1,714
|
)
|
-
|
|||||
(1,563
|
)
|
(2,010
|
)
|
(1,050
|
)
|
|||||
$
|
1,719
|
$
|
358
|
$
|
1,158
|
Income
tax expense for the years ended December 31, 2005, 2004, and 2003 differ from
the amount computed by applying the federal statutory corporate rate to income
before income taxes. The differences are reconciled as follows:
55
Years
ended December 31,
|
||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
||||||||
Tax
expense at statutory rate of 35%
|
$
|
3,464
|
$
|
5,351
|
$
|
3,302
|
||||
State
income taxes, net of federal benefit
|
84
|
147
|
292
|
|||||||
Foreign
tax rate difference
|
(2,771
|
)
|
(1,309
|
)
|
602
|
|||||
Research
and development credit
|
(274
|
)
|
(270
|
)
|
(106
|
)
|
||||
Change
in valuation allowance
|
1,247
|
(3,191
|
)
|
(3,974
|
)
|
|||||
Change
in foreign tax rate
|
-
|
-
|
381
|
|||||||
Other
|
(31
|
)
|
(370
|
)
|
661
|
|||||
Total
income tax expense
|
$
|
1,719
|
$
|
358
|
$
|
1,158
|
The
components of the Company’s net deferred income tax asset are as follows:
December
31,
|
|||||||
2005
|
2004
|
||||||
Net
deferred income tax asset - Current
|
|||||||
Product
design costs
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
(175
|
)
|
||
Intercompany
profit in inventory
|
2,166
|
993
|
|||||
Warranty
costs
|
242
|
141
|
|||||
Bad
debt reserve
|
32
|
9
|
|||||
Inventory
reserve
|
59
|
-
|
|||||
Unearned
service revenue
|
723
|
-
|
|||||
Other
|
4
|
20
|
|||||
Deferred
income tax asset - Current
|
3,226
|
988
|
|||||
Valuation
Allowance
|
(1,071
|
)
|
(244
|
)
|
|||
Net
deferred income tax asset - Current
|
$
|
2,155
|
$
|
744
|
|||
Net
deferred income tax asset - Non-current
|
|||||||
Depreciation
|
$
|
886
|
$
|
853
|
|||
Goodwill
amortization
|
(880
|
)
|
(650
|
)
|
|||
Product
design costs
|
(128
|
)
|
-
|
||||
Employee
stock options
|
55
|
188
|
|||||
Unearned
service revenue
|
199
|
617
|
|||||
Tax
credits
|
716
|
1,019
|
|||||
Loss
carryforwards
|
5,422
|
3,649
|
|||||
Deferred
income tax asset - Non-current
|
6,270
|
5,676
|
|||||
Valuation
Allowance
|
(2,415
|
)
|
(1,403
|
)
|
|||
Net
deferred income tax asset - Non-current
|
$
|
3,855
|
$
|
4,273
|
56
At
December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company’s domestic entities had deferred income
tax assets in the amount of $4,074 and $3,306, respectively. The Company has
determined that these amounts are fully realizable and have not established
any
valuation allowance based on the assessment that they are more-likely-than-not
to be utilized.
At
December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company’s foreign subsidiaries had deferred
income tax assets relating to net operating loss carry forwards, which do not
expire, of $5,422 and $3,359, respectively. For financial reporting purposes,
a
valuation allowance of $3,486 and $1,647, respectively has been recognized
to
offset the deferred tax assets relating to net operating losses.
The
Company continues to maintain a valuation allowance on net operating losses
in
jurisdictions for which it does not have a history of earnings over the last
three years and where the Company believes that the deferred tax assets are
not
more-likely-than-not to be realized. The Company increased the overall valuation
allowance in 2005 on its deferred tax assets in the amount of $1,839. The
increase in the valuation allowance for 2005 relates to the net generation
of
deferred tax assets in foreign jurisdictions, combined with $809 from the
purchase of iQvolution and the release of $44 in valuation allowance in a
foreign jurisdiction in the second quarter. The release of the valuation
allowance was based on one of its foreign units having demonstrated a history
of
earnings over the past three years, and with management’s assessment that the
unit will be more-likely-than-not to utilize their deferred tax assets.
Management calculated the amount to release from the valuation allowance using
projections of future taxable earnings over the next two years.
At
December 31, 2005 and 2004, the Company had $716 and $1,019 in tax credits,
respectively. These credits are related to the Company’s research and
development activities and expire in 16 to 20 years. The Company fully expects
to realize these credits before expiration.
The
Company operates in a number of different countries around the world. In 2003,
the Company began to manufacture its products in Switzerland, where it has
received a favorable income tax rate commitment from the Swiss government as
an
incentive to establish a manufacturing plant there. In 2005, the Company opened
a regional headquarters and began to manufacture its products in Singapore,
where it has received a temporary reduced income tax rate commitment from the
Singapore Economic Development Board as an incentive to establish a
manufacturing plant and regional headquarters there.
We
have
not recognized any U.S. tax expense on undistributed international earnings
since we intend to reinvest the earnings outside the U.S. for the foreseeable
future. Our net undistributed international earnings were approximately $20.6
million and $5.4 million at December 31, 2005, and 2004,
respectively.
Significant
judgment is required in determining our worldwide provision for income taxes.
In
the ordinary course of a global business, there are many transactions for which
the ultimate tax outcome is uncertain. The Company reviews its tax contingencies
on a regular basis and makes appropriate accruals as necessary.
15. SHARE
ISSUANCE
On
November 12, 2003, the Company sold 1,158,000 shares of its common stock, and
two of the Company’s founders sold 772,000 shares of the Company’s common stock
to institutional investors in a private placement that was not registered under
the Securities Act of 1933. The shares were sold for $21.50 per share, resulting
in total proceeds before placement agent fees and other offering expenses of
$24.9 million and $16.6 million to the Company and the co-founders,
respectively. The purchasers of the shares sold in the transaction were 31
institutional investors. Robert W. Baird & Co. served as the placement agent
for the transaction, and received a fee equal to $2,489,700, or 6% of the
aggregate sales proceeds. The Company also reimbursed Robert W. Baird & Co.
for $50,000 in expenses incurred in connection with the transaction.
57
16. COMMITMENTS
AND CONTINGENCIES
Leases—The
following is a schedule of future minimum lease payments required under
non-cancelable operating leases with initial terms in excess of one year,
including leases with related parties (see Note 12), in effect at
December 31, 2005:
Years
ending December 31,
|
Amount
|
|||
2006
|
$
|
2,519
|
||
2007
|
1,823
|
|||
2008
|
1,495
|
|||
2009
|
1,220
|
|||
2010
|
468
|
|||
Thereafter
|
-
|
|||
Total
future minimum lease payments
|
$
|
7,252
|
Rent
expense for 2005, 2004, and 2003, was approximately $2,306, $1,651
and
$1,148,
respectively.
Patent
Litigation—
On
November 25, 2003, Cimcore-Romer (now a division of Hexagon) filed a patent
infringement suit against us in the Federal District Court for the Southern
District of California alleging that certain of our products sold in the United
States, including the FARO Arm, infringe U.S. Patent 5,829,148 (‘148 patent).
The Company believes, and has contended in this litigation, that the Company
does not infringe the ‘148 patent and that the ‘148 patent is
invalid.
On
July
12, 2005, the court issued an order granting Cimcore-Romer’s motion for summary
judgment of infringement of three claims of the ‘148 patent. On July 22, 2005,
the Company announced its decision to limit the capability of its U.S.-based
FARO Arm products (the FARO Arm, the FARO Gage and the Digital Template) by
removing what we call the “infinite rotation feature” by reducing this
capability to 50 rotations or fewer. FARO believes that by limiting the range
of
the joint rotation to 50 rotations, it has removed from its U.S. products the
ability to sweep through an unlimited arc, which is a feature of the ‘148 patent
claims addressed by the court’s ruling required to infringe the ‘148 patent. The
revised products have not, however, been considered by the courts. Accordingly,
we cannot give assurance that the revised products will not be deemed to
infringe the ‘148 patent.
58
On
September 20, 2005, the Court vacated its order of summary judgment of
infringement and agreed to reconsider its conclusions from the patent claim
construction (“Markman”) ruling, which is a pretrial hearing often used in
patent infringement cases. The new Markman hearing occurred on October 3, 2005
and the hearing-on-summary judgments of infringement occurred on November 14,
2005. On October 18, 2005, the Court issued a revised claim construction that
the Company believes materially alters the Court’s previous Markman ruling by
substantially narrowing what FARO believes to be key aspects of the claim
construction. The Company believes that this narrower claim construction will
ultimately lead to a finding that it does not infringe any claim of the ‘148
patent. On November 14, 2005, the Court denied both the Plaintiffs’ Renewed
Motion for Summary Judgment of Infringement and the Defendant’s Faro’s Renewed
Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement, and determined that there
existed a genuine issue of material fact with respect to whether Faro infringed
the assert patent. The case was originally set for trial for January 31, 2006.
On January 18, 2006, the Court vacated the trial date and remanded the case
to
the magistrate for resumption of discovery regarding Plaintiffs’ alleged
compliance with the patent marking provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 287 and all related
issues. A hearing on Faro’s Motion for Partial Summary Judgment Regarding
Plaintiffs’ Failure to Comply With the Patent Marking Provisions of 35 U.S.C. §
287 was held on May 11, 2006. A new trial date has been set for July 17,
2006.
In
addition, the Company filed two separate requests for reexamination in the
U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) of the ‘148 Patent, both of which requests
were granted. The PTO ruled in the first reexamination in September 2005. The
Company believes that the PTO ruling bolsters the Company’s previous position
that it does not infringe the ‘148 patent. More specifically, in the first
reexamination, the PTO construed critical claim terms in a relatively narrow
manner, which the Company believes is consistent with its stated positions
in
the patent litigation. This narrow claim construction led the PTO to
differentiate the claims for the references at issue in the first reexamination.
The Company believes that this narrow construction, while allowing the ‘148
claims to be confirmed valid over the aforementioned references in the first
reexamination, will prevent the California District Court from ruling that
Faro’s products infringe the ‘148 patent. The Company’s second reexamination
request was granted by the PTO in November 2005 and is based on new “prior art”
(that is, earlier issued patent publications) submitted to the PTO which FARO
believes will ultimately invalidate the ‘148 patent. This prior art reference
was not at issue in the first reexamination proceeding. The PTO has not ruled
in
the second reexamination request.
In
the
event of an adverse ruling in the Cimcore-Romer litigation, however, we could
be
required to pay substantial damages, cease the manufacturing, use and sale
of
any infringing products, discontinue the use of certain processes or obtain
a
license, if available, from Cimcore-Romer with royalty payment obligations
by
us. An adverse decision in the Cimcore-Romer case could materially and adversely
affect our financial condition and results of operations. At this time, however,
the Company cannot estimate the potential impact, if any, that might result
from
this suit, and therefore, no provision has been made to cover such
expense
Securities
Litigation—
On
December 6, 2005, the first of four essentially identical class action
securities fraud lawsuits were filed against the Company and certain officers
of
the Company. On April 19, 2006, the four lawsuits were consolidated, and
Kornitzer Capital Management, Inc. was appointed as the lead plaintiff. On
May
16, 2006, Kornitzer filed its Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint
against the Company and the individual defendents. The amended complaint also
names Grant Thornton LLP, the Company’s independent registered public accounting
firm, as an additional defendant.
In
the
amended complaint, Kornitzer seeks to represent a class consisting of all
persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s publicly traded
securities between April 15, 2004 and March 15, 2006. On behalf of the alleged
class, Kornitzer seeks an unspecified amount of damages, premised on allegations
that each defendant made misrepresentations and omissions of material fact
during the class period in violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Among other things, Kornitzer alleges that the Company’s reported gross margins
and net income were knowingly overstated as a result of manipulation of the
Company’s inventory levels, that the Company failed to disclose deficiencies
associated with the Company’s implementation and use of its enterprise resource
planning system and material requirements planning system, made false and
misleading statements regarding the Company’s internal controls; failed to
disclose the fact that the Company was accruing commissions and bonuses which
would have a material, adverse effect upon the Company’s profitability, and
improperly reported sales and net income based, in part, on sales and new orders
obtained in violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
59
The
Company’s deadline for filing its response to the amended complaint is July 31,
2006. The Company intends to file a motion to dismiss. The Company has timely
notified the issuer of its Executive Liability and Entity Securities Liability
insurance policy of the Securities Litigation, and has reserved the full amount
of its $250,000 retention under the policy. Although the Company believes that
the material allegations made in the amended complaint are without merit and
intends to vigorously defend the Securities Litigation, no assurances can be
given with respect to the outcome of the Securities Litigation.
Purchase
Commitments—The
Company enters into purchase commitments for products and services in the
ordinary course of business. These purchases generally cover production
requirements for 60 to 90 days. On August 11, 2005, FARO entered into an
agreement with DELCAM plc under which the Company agreed to purchase
approximately $1.4 million in products over a 12-month term. At December 31,
2005, the Company had completed the purchase of $0.6 million in products under
this agreement. Effective November 1, 2005, FARO entered into an agreement
with
Metrologic Group S.A. under which the Company agreed to purchase approximately
$0.4 million in products over a 12-month term. At December 31, 2005, no products
had been purchased under this agreement. Other than the agreements listed above,
the Company does not have any long-term commitments for purchases.
Voluntary
Disclosure of Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Matter to the Securities and
Exchange Commission and Department of Justice. - As
previously reported on the Company’s Form 8-K dated March 15, 2006, the Company
learned that its China subsidiary had made payments to certain customers in
China that may have violated the FCPA and other applicable laws. The Company’s
Audit Committee instituted an internal investigation into this matter in
February 2006, and the Company voluntarily notified the SEC and the DOJ of
this
matter in March 2006. The internal investigation into this matter has been
completed. The Company has provided to the SEC and the DOJ information obtained
during the course of this investigation and is cooperating with both agencies.
The
Company’s internal investigation has identified certain improper payments made
in China and deficiencies in its controls with respect to its operations in
China in possible violation of the FCPA. If the SEC or the DOJ determines that
violations of the FCPA have occurred, they could seek civil and criminal
sanctions, including monetary penalties, against the Company and/or certain
of
its employees, as well as additional changes to the Company’s business practices
and compliance programs. Based on current information, it is not possible to
predict at this time when the SEC or DOJ investigations will be resolved,
what the outcome will be, what sanctions, if any, will be imposed, or the effect
that such matters may ultimately have on the Company or its consolidated
financial statements. Results of the investigation revealed that the referral
fee payments in possible violation of the FCPA were $165,000 and $265,000
in 2004 and 2005, respectively, which were recorded in selling expenses in
the
Company's statement of income. The related sales to customers to which
payment of these referral fees had been made totaled approximately $1.3 million
and $3.24 million in 2004 and 2005, respecively. Additional improper
referral fee payments of $122,000 were made in January and February 2006 related
to sales contracts in 2005. The Company anticipates incurring
expenses of at least $3.5 million in 2006 relating to its internal investigation
of the FCPA matter.
The
Company has terminated certain personnel in the Asia-Pacific Region and has
re-assigned the duties of other personnel in both the Asia-Pacific Region and
the U.S. as a result of the internal investigation. The Company is instituting
the following remedial measures:
· |
Contracted
with a third party forensics accounting team to conduct an in-depth
audit
of the operations in China and in other countries in the Asia-Pacific
Region and to make recommendations for improvement to the internal
control
systems.
|
· |
Reviewing
third party distributor arrangements in an effort to assure that
all
contracts include adherence to the FCPA.
|
60
· |
Performing
due diligence on all third party distributors and implementing a
process
to assess potential new distributors.
|
· |
Established
an in-house internal audit function including hiring a Director of
Internal Audit.
|
· |
Consolidating
the human resources, financial accounting and reporting functions
for the
Asia region into the Singapore
Operations.
|
· |
Implemented
an internal certification process to ascertain whether similar issues
may
exist elsewhere in the Company.
|
· |
Implemented
a quarterly internal certification process to confirm adherence to
company
policy and all applicable laws and regulations that will include
all
regional leadership, country management and other sales
management.
|
· |
Implementing
additional training on FCPA and other matters for employees and a
confidential compliance reporting
system.
|
The
Company reported sales in China of $9.0 million in 2005 and $4.2 million in
2004, approximately 7% and 4% of total sales, respectively. Depending on how
this matter is resolved, the Company’s sales in China could be significantly
impacted. The termination of certain personnel and cessation of improper
payments in China may have a significant adverse effect on future operations
in
China because such action could negatively influence the decisions of a
significant number of customers of the Chinese subsidiary to do business with
that subsidiary. The potential magnitude of the loss of sales in China as a
result of potential violations of the FCPA cannot be estimated at this
time.
During
the Company’s internal investigation of its business practices in China, it
became aware that income taxes related to certain commissions and bonus payments
to its employees had not been properly reported. The Company will promptly
remit
any deficiencies after it has completed its investigation. At this time, the
Company does not anticipate the amount will have a material effect on its
financial condition or results of operations. The Company may be subject to
penalties by the Chinese tax authorities, but we are not able to determine
the
amount, if any, of the assessment.
Other
than the litigation mentioned above, the Company is not involved in any other
legal proceedings other than routine litigation arising in the normal course
of
business. The Company does not believe the results of such litigation, even
if
the outcome were unfavorable to the Company, would have a material adverse
effect on the Company’s business, financial condition or results of
operations.
17. STOCK
COMPENSATION PLANS
The
Company has four stock option plans that provide for the granting of stock
options to key employees and non-employee members of the Board of Directors.
The
1993 Stock Option Plan (1993 Plan) and the 1997 Employee Stock Option Plan
(1997
Plan) provide for granting incentive stock options and nonqualified stock
options to officers and key employees of the Company. The 1997 Non-employee
Director Plan provides for granting nonqualified stock options and formula
options to non-employee directors. The 2004 Equity Incentive Plan (2004 Plan)
provides for granting options or stock appreciation rights to employees and
non-employee directors.
61
The
Company is authorized to grant options for up to 703,100 shares of common stock
under the 1993 Plan, of which 1 option is currently outstanding at an exercise
price of $3.60. This option vests over a 3-year period. The Company is also
authorized to grant options for up to 1,400,000 shares of common stock under
the
1997 Plan, of which 382,047 options are currently outstanding at exercise prices
between $1.50 and $27.40. These options vest over a 3-year period. The Company
is also authorized to grant up to 250,000 shares of common stock under the
1997
Non-employee Director Plan of which 80,000 options are currently outstanding
at
exercise prices between $1.61 and $21.56. Each non-employee director is granted
3,000 options upon election to the Board of Directors and then annually upon
attending the annual meeting of shareholders (formula options). Formula options
granted to directors are generally granted upon the same terms and conditions
as
options granted to officers and employees. These options vest over a 3-year
period. The Company is also authorized to grant options for up to 1,750,000
shares of common stock under the 2004 Plan, of which 877,986 options are
currently outstanding at exercise prices between $19.34 to $31.45, and 57,259
restricted stock units are outstanding at a stock price of $19.49. These options
and restricted stock units vest over a 3-year period. The restricted stock
unit
grants have a performance-based annual vesting on the anniversary date over
their respective terms. The Company records compensation cost associated with
its restricted stock unit grants on a straight-line basis over the vesting
term.
In
addition to the four stock option plans, the Company has the 1997 Non-Employee
Directors Fee Plan (1997 Fee Plan) under which the Company is authorized to
issue up to 250,000 shares of Common Stock and permits non-employee directors
to
elect to receive directors’ fees in the form of common stock rather than cash.
Common stock issued in lieu of cash directors’ fees is issued at the end of the
quarter in which the fees are earned, with the number of shares being based
on
the fair market value of the common stock for the five trading days immediately
preceding the last business day of the quarter. The 1997 Fee Plan also permits
non-employee directors to irrevocably elect to defer receipt of all or any
portion of the shares of common stock which would otherwise be payable. As of
December 31, 2005 and 2004 there were 11,090 and 35,941 shares, respectively,
which were accrued but not yet issued in connection with director’s
elections.
In
the
fourth quarter of 2001, the Company cancelled approximately 548,000 “out of the
money” options, including approximately 440,000 options issued under the 1997
Plan and approximately 108,000 options issued under the 1997 Non-employee
Director Plan. As a result, 62,806 options granted in 2001, under the 1997
Plan
and to holders of some of the options cancelled, were subjected to variable
accounting treatment. Under FIN 44, stock options issued within six months
of a
cancellation must be accounted for as variable under certain circumstances.
Variable accounting requires companies to re-measure compensation costs for
the
variable options based on the Company’s share price until the options are
exercised, cancelled or forfeited without replacement. Compensation is dependent
on fluctuations in the quoted market prices for the Company’s common stock. Such
compensation costs will be recognized over a three-year vesting schedule until
the options are fully vested, exercised, cancelled or forfeited, after which
time the compensation will be recognized immediately at each reporting period.
With the adoption of FAS 123(R) in January of 2006, FIN 44 will be superseded
and the Company will no longer be required to account for these options under
variable accounting.
In
the
fourth quarter of 2005, the Company accelerated the vesting for substantially
all of its outstanding options, and expects to record minimal expenses for
its
remaining unvested stock options during 2006. The pre-tax charge estimated
by
the Company to be avoided as a result of the acceleration amounts to
approximately $7.7 million over the course of the original vesting periods.
The
fair value for any future grants will be included in expense over the vesting
periods.
Compensation
(income) costs charged to operations associated with the Company’s stock option
plans were ($150), $277, and
$719
in 2005, 2004, and 2003, respectively. The changes in stock option associated
compensation cost were due to the vesting of options combined with market price
fluctuations in the Company’s common stock under variable accounting and the
accrual of expenses relating to the issuance of restricted stock.
62
A
summary
of stock option activity and weighted average exercise prices follows:
Years
Ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
|||||||||||||||||
Options
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
Options
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
Options
|
Weighted-Average
Exercise Price
|
||||||||||||||
Outstanding
at beginning of year
|
1,215,240
|
$
|
13.69
|
978,952
|
$
|
2.42
|
1,554,513
|
$
|
2.41
|
||||||||||
Granted
|
314,123
|
22.75
|
750,730
|
20.86
|
22,500
|
5.39
|
|||||||||||||
Forfeited
|
(51,830
|
)
|
20.06
|
(28,930
|
)
|
8.06
|
(69,222
|
)
|
2.13
|
||||||||||
Exercised
|
(137,499
|
)
|
2.47
|
(485,512
|
)
|
2.41
|
(528,839
|
)
|
2.46
|
||||||||||
Outstanding
at end of year
|
1,340,034
|
$
|
16.72
|
1,215,240
|
$
|
13.69
|
978,952
|
$
|
2.42
|
||||||||||
Outstanding
exercisable at year-end
|
1,329,366
|
$
|
16.82
|
339,465
|
$
|
6.40
|
501,631
|
$
|
2.61
|
||||||||||
Weighted-average
fair value of options
|
|||||||||||||||||||
granted
during the year
|
$
|
11.03
|
$
|
13.67
|
$
|
3.35
|
A
summary
of stock options outstanding and exercisable as of December 31, 2005 follows:
Weighted-Average
|
|
|||||||||||||||
Options
|
Remaining
Contractual
Life
|
Average Exercise |
Options
|
Average Exercise |
||||||||||||
Exercise Price
|
Outstanding
|
(years)
|
Price
|
Exercisable
|
Price
|
|||||||||||
Up
to $1.50
|
30,312
|
5.84
|
$
|
1.50
|
30,312
|
$
|
1.50
|
|||||||||
$1.51-$3.00
|
283,812
|
6.23
|
2.23
|
280,645
|
2.23
|
|||||||||||
$3.01-$10.00
|
26,503
|
6.21
|
4.46
|
19,002
|
4.09
|
|||||||||||
$10.01-$20.00
|
505,460
|
8.85
|
19.27
|
505,460
|
19.27
|
|||||||||||
Over
$20.00
|
493,947
|
8.82
|
24.03
|
493,947
|
24.03
|
|||||||||||
1,340,034
|
8.17
|
$
|
16.72
|
1,329,366
|
$
|
16.82
|
Remaining
non-exercisable options as of December 31, 2005 become exercisable as follows:
Years
ending December 31,
|
Amount
|
||||||
2006 |
10,668
|
||||||
10,668
|
18. EARNINGS
PER SHARE
A
reconciliation of the number of common shares used in the calculation of basic
and diluted earnings per share (EPS) is presented below:
Years
ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
|||||||||||||||||
Per-Share
|
Per-Share
|
Per-Share
|
|||||||||||||||||
Shares
|
Amount
|
Shares
|
Amount
|
Shares
|
Amount
|
||||||||||||||
Basic
EPS
|
14,169,140
|
$
|
0.58
|
13,833,590
|
$
|
1.08
|
12,181,221
|
$
|
0.68
|
||||||||||
Effect
of dilutive securities
|
273,108
|
(0.01
|
)
|
189,569
|
(0.02
|
)
|
664,771
|
(0.04
|
)
|
||||||||||
Diluted
EPS
|
14,442,248
|
$
|
0.57
|
14,023,159
|
$
|
1.06
|
12,845,992
|
$
|
0.64
|
The
effect of 237,419 dilutive securities was not included for 2005 as they were
antidilutive.
19. EMPLOYEE
RETIREMENT BENEFIT PLAN
The
Company maintains a 401(k) defined contribution retirement plan for its U.S.
employees, which provides benefits for all employees meeting certain age and
service requirements. The Company may make a discretionary contribution each
plan year, as determined by its Board of Directors. Discretionary contributions
or employer matches can be made to the participant’s account but cannot exceed
100% of compensation. Costs charged to operations in connection with the Plan
during 2005, 2004, and 2003 aggregated $201, $172, and $113, respectively.
20.
GEOGRAPHIC DATA
The
Company develops, manufactures, markets and supports CAD-based quality assurance
products integrated with CAD-based inspection and statistical process control
software. This one line of business represents approximately 99% of consolidated
sales and is the Company’s only segment. The Company operates through sales
teams established by geographic area. Each team is equipped to deliver the
entire line of Company products to customers within its geographic area.
The
following table presents information about the Company by geographic area:
As
of and for the year ended December 31,
|
|||||||||||||||||||
2005
|
2004
|
2003
|
|||||||||||||||||
Sales
|
Long-lived
Assets
|
Sales
|
Long-lived
Assets
|
Sales
|
Long-lived
Assets
|
||||||||||||||
Americas
Region
|
$
|
55,884
|
$
|
2,307
|
$
|
41,680
|
$
|
2,315
|
$
|
37,863
|
$
|
1,467
|
|||||||
Europe/Africa
Region
|
44,940
|
3,288
|
43,111
|
1,239
|
27,701
|
1,106
|
|||||||||||||
Asia
Pacific Region
|
24,766
|
469
|
12,229
|
461
|
6,222
|
180
|
|||||||||||||
$
|
125,590
|
$
|
6,064
|
$
|
97,020
|
$
|
4,015
|
$
|
71,786
|
$
|
2,753
|
The
geographical sales information presented above represents sales to customers
located in each respective region whereas the long-lived assets information
represents assets held in the respective regions.
63
21. QUARTERLY
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
QUARTERLY
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS (UNAUDITED)
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
April
2,
|
July
2,
|
October
1,
|
December
31,
|
||||||||||
Quarter
ended
|
2005
|
2005
|
2005
|
2005
|
|||||||||
Sales
|
$
|
27,617
|
$
|
30,895
|
$
|
32,598
|
$
|
34,480
|
|||||
Gross
profit
|
17,343
|
18,390
|
17,685
|
19,514
|
|||||||||
Net
income
|
3,469
|
1,912
|
2,615
|
183
|
|||||||||
Net
income per share:
|
|||||||||||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.25
|
$
|
0.13
|
$
|
0.18
|
$
|
0.01
|
|||||
Diluted
|
$
|
0.24
|
$
|
0.13
|
$
|
0.18
|
$
|
0.01
|
|||||
|
April
3,
|
July
3,
|
October
2,
|
December
31,
|
|||||||||
Quarter
ended
|
2004
|
2004
|
2004
|
2004
|
|||||||||
Sales
|
$
|
21,025
|
$
|
24,077
|
$
|
23,376
|
$
|
28,542
|
|||||
Gross
profit
|
13,464
|
15,228
|
14,757
|
16,547
|
|||||||||
Net
income
|
2,848
|
4,103
|
3,065
|
4,915
|
|||||||||
Net
income per share:
|
|||||||||||||
Basic
|
$
|
0.21
|
$
|
0.30
|
$
|
0.22
|
$
|
0.35
|
|||||
Diluted
|
$
|
0.20
|
$
|
0.29
|
$
|
0.22
|
$
|
0.34
|
64
Item
9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure.
|
None.
Item
9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures.
|
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As
of
December 31, 2005, management carried out an evaluation, under the supervision
and with the participation of its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of its disclosure
controls and procedures as such term is defined under Securities Exchange Act
of
1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) Rule 13a-15(e). Based on this evaluation,
management has concluded that as of December 31, 2005, such disclosure controls
and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that the Company
records, processes, summarizes and reports the information the Company must
disclose in reports that the Company files or submits under the Exchange Act
within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms.
Management’s
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our
Co-Chief Executive Officers and Chief Financial Officer, together with other
members of management of FARO Technologies Inc., are responsible for
establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting.
Internal
control over financial reporting is the process designed under our supervision,
and effected by our Board of Directors, management and other personnel, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of our financial statements for external purposes in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
of
America.
There
are
inherent limitations in the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting, including the possibility that misstatements may not be prevented
or
detected. Accordingly, an effective control system, no matter how well designed
and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the designed
control objectives, and management is required to apply its judgment in
evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and procedures.
Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation
of controls
can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud,
if any, within the company have been detected. These inherent limitations
include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and
that
breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls
can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of
two
or more people, or by management over ride of the control. The design of any
system of controls also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the
likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design
will
succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions.
Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system,
misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
As
previously reported on the Company’s Form 8-K dated March 15, 2006, the Company
learned that its China subsidiary had made payments to certain customers in
China that may have violated the FCPA and other applicable laws. The Company’s
Audit Committee instituted an internal investigation into this matter, and
the
Company voluntarily notified the SEC and the DOJ of this matter and provided
them with information obtained during the course of the investigation and is
cooperating fully with both agencies. The Company’s internal investigation has
identified certain payments made in China and deficiencies in its controls
with
respect to its operations in China in possible violation of the
FCPA.
65
Management
has evaluated the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
as
of December 31, 2005, in relation to criteria described in Internal
Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
Commission of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based upon this evaluation and
the
new facts that have arisen prior to filing Form 10-K, management has concluded
that certain deficiencies exist in the design and operation of internal controls
related to financial reporting, which represent a material weakness in internal
control over financial reporting.
As
a
result of these findings, management has undertaken the following actions to
address the control deficiencies:
· |
Contracted
with a third party forensics accounting team to conduct an in-depth
audit
of the operations in China and in other countries in the Asia-Pacific
Region and to make recommendations for improvement to the internal
control
systems.
|
· |
Reviewing
third party distributor arrangements in an effort to assure that
all
contracts include adherence to the FCPA.
|
· |
Performing
due diligence on all third party distributors and implementing a
process
to assess potential new distributors.
|
· |
Established
an in-house internal audit function including hiring a Director of
Internal Audit.
|
· |
Consolidating
the human resources, financial accounting and reporting functions
for the
Asia region into the Singapore
Operations.
|
· |
Implemented
an internal certification process to ascertain whether similar issues
may
exist elsewhere in the Company.
|
· |
Implemented
a quarterly internal certification process to confirm adherence to
company
policy and all applicable laws and regulations that will include
all
regional leadership, country management and other sales management.
|
· |
Implementing
additional training on FCPA and other matters for employees and a
confidential compliance reporting
system.
|
Grant
Thornton LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, has issued
their report on management’s assessment of internal control over financial
reporting, which appears below.
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There
were no other changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting
during the year ended December 31, 2005 that have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over
financial reporting.
66
REPORT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To
the
Board of Directors and Shareholders of FARO Technologies, Inc.:
We
have
audited management’s assessment, included in the accompanying Management’s
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting, that FARO Technologies,
Inc. (a Florida Corporation) and subsidiaries did not maintain effective
internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, because
of
the effect of the lack of controls in place to prevent unauthorized payments
made to intermediaries that resulted in violations of the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (COSO). FARO Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries management is
responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting
and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’s
assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the company’s internal control
over financial reporting based on our audit.
We
conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that
we plan
and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective
internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control
over
financial reporting, evaluating management’s assessment, testing and evaluating
the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing
such
other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe
that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinions.
A
company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting
and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over
financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain
to
the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2)
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary
to
permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are
being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors
of
the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or
timely
detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s
assets that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
Because
of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may
not
prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of
effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may
become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance
with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
A
material weakness is a control deficiency, or combination of control
deficiencies, that results in more than a remote likelihood that a material
misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented
or detected. The following material weakness has been identified and included
in
management’s assessment. The controls were not in place to provide reasonable
assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition,
use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on
the financial statements which resulted in unauthorized payments made to
intermediaries that violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. This material
weakness was considered in determining the nature, timing, and extent of
audit
tests applied in our audit of the 2005 financial statements, and this report
does not affect our report dated June 21, 2006 on those financial
statements.
/s/
GRANT
THORNTON LLP
Orlando,
Florida
June
21,
2006
67
Item
9B.
|
Other
Information.
|
On
June
28, 2006, Greg Fraser entered into an agreement with the Company pursuant to
which Mr. Fraser will be retiring from the Company and from his position as
Executive Vice President and as a Director of the Company on December 29,
2006.
Pursuant
to Mr. Fraser's employment agreement, Mr. Fraser will be employed as an
Executive Vice President and a director at an annual salary of $245,000 through
his retirement on December 29, 2006. In his capacity as an Executive Vice
President, Mr. Fraser will report to the Company's Co-Chief Executive Officers
and shall have such responsibilities, duties, and authority assigned to him
by
them. Mr. Fraser is entitled to severance equal to the continuation of his
salary through December 29, 2006 in the event that the Company terminates
his
employment without good cause or in the event that Mr. Fraser terminates
his own
employment with good reason prior to December 29, 2006. Mr. Fraser's employment
agreement contains a three-year non-compete provision, a two year
non-solicitation provision, and confidentiality and assignment of inventions
provisions.
68
PART
III
Item
10.
|
Directors
and Executive Officers of the
Registrant.
|
Executive
Officers and Directors
The
following table sets forth information regarding the executive officers,
directors, and key management personnel of the Company as of June 19, 2006:
Name
|
Age
|
Principal
Position
|
||
Simon
Raab, Ph.D.
|
53
|
Chairman
of the Board and Co-Chief Executive Officer
|
||
Jay
W. Freeland
|
36
|
Co-Chief
Executive Officer, President, and Director
|
||
Barbara
R. Smith
|
47
|
Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
|
||
Gregory
A. Fraser, Ph.D.
|
51
|
Executive
Vice President and Director
|
||
Robert
P. Large
|
56
|
Senior
Vice President and Managing Director of FARO
Asia/Pacific
|
||
Siegfried
K. Buss
|
40
|
Senior
Vice President and Managing
Director of FARO Europe
|
||
Allen
Sajedi
|
46
|
Vice
President and Chief
Technical Officer
|
||
Stephen
R. Cole(1)(3)(4)
|
53
|
Director
|
||
John
Caldwell(1)(2)(3)(4)
|
56
|
Director
|
||
Norman
Schipper, Q.C.(3)(4)
|
75
|
Director
|
||
Andre
Julien(2)(3)(4)
|
62
|
Director
|
||
Hubert
d’Amours(1)(3)(4)
|
67
|
Director
|
_____________________________________
(1)
Member of the Audit Committee
(2)
Member of the Operational Audit Committee
(3)
Member of the Compensation Committee
(4)
Member of the Nominating Committee
Simon
Raab, Ph.D is
a
co-founder of the Company and has served as the Chairman of the Board and
Co-Chief Executive Officer since January 2006. Previously, he served as the
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company since its
inception in 1982, and as President of the Company from 1986 until 2004. Mr.
Raab holds a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from McGill University, Montreal,
Canada, a Masters of Engineering Physics from Cornell University and a Bachelor
of Science in Physics with a minor in Biophysics from the University of
Waterloo, Canada.
Jay
W. Freeland has
served as President and Co-Chief Executive Officer since January 2006. Prior
to
that he served as President and Chief Operating Officer of the Company since
November 2004. Mr. Freeland was elected to the Board of Directors of the Company
in February 2006. Prior to that Mr. Freeland was president of his own consulting
company for two years. Mr. Freeland began his career at General Electric
(GE-NYSE) in their financial management program in 1991, spent four years on
their corporate audit staff and served in financial, business development,
strategic planning, sales and operational management roles of increasing
responsibility until 2003. Mr. Freeland holds a Bachelor of Arts in Economics
from Union College, Schenectady, New York.
69
Barbara
R. Smith has
served as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company
since
February 2005. Prior to that Ms. Smith served as Vice President, Finance of
Alcoa’s (AA-NYSE) aerospace, automotive and commercial transportation group,
based in Cleveland, Ohio. Ms. Smith has held senior financial management
positions at Alcoa since 1993, after joining that company in 1981. Ms.
Smith
holds a Bachelor of Science in Accounting degree from Purdue University, West
Lafayette, Indiana.
Gregory
A. Fraser, Ph.D.,
a
co-founder of the Company, has served as Executive Vice President since February
2005. Mr. Fraser served as Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President
from May 1997 through February 2005, as Secretary and Treasurer through June
2006, and a director of the Company since its inception in 1982. Mr. Fraser
holds a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering from McGill University, Montreal,
Canada, a Masters of Theoretical and Applied Mechanics from Northwestern
University and a Bachelor of Science and Bachelor of Mechanical Engineering
from
Northwestern University.
Robert
P. Large has
served as Senior Vice President and Managing Director of FARO Asia/Pacific
since
June 2005. He previously served as Vice President of Sales from June 2001 until
June 2005. Prior to that, Mr. Large was Vice President of Sales of the Hill
-
Rom Company, a division of Hillenbrand Industries, Batesville, Indiana
(HB-NYSE). Mr. Large has held upper management positions in sales and marketing
with Hillenbrand, as well as Biomet Corp. (BMET-NASDAQ), OEC Co., and AHS Corp.
Mr. Large holds a Bachelor of Business Management degree from Baldwin - Wallace
College, Berea, Ohio and attended New England School of Law, Boston,
Massachusetts and Western New England School of Law, Springfield,
Massachusetts.
Siegfried
K. Buss, a
co-founder of CATS GmbH, a predecessor of FARO Europe, the Company’s principal
subsidiary in Europe, has served as Senior Vice President and Managing Director
of FARO Europe since February 2006. He previously served as Co-managing Director
of FARO Europe from May 1998 until February 2006. Prior to that Mr. Buss was
Managing Director of CATS GmbH.
Allen
Sajedi
has
served as Vice President and Chief Technical Officer since 2002 and as Chief
Engineer of the Company since 1990. Mr. Sajedi holds a Bachelor’s Degree in
Mechanical
Engineering
from
McGill
University, Montreal, Canada.
Stephen
R. Cole
has been
a director of the company since 2002. He was appointed lead director in
2005. Since 1975, Mr. Cole has been President and Founding Partner of Cole
& Partners, a Toronto, Canada based mergers and acquisition and corporate
finance advisory service company. Mr. Cole is a Fellow of the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of Ontario, Fellow of the Canadian Chartered Institute
of
Business Valuators, Senior Member of the American Society of Appraisers and
Full
Member of the ADR Institute of Canada, Inc. He is currently serving or has
held positions as advisory committee member of various private and public
companies,
charitable and professional organizations, including FARO Technologies, Inc.,
H.
Paulin & Co. Limited, Bosa Group, GPX International Tire Corporation,
Enterprise Capital LP II, The Canadian Institute of Chartered Business
Valuators, Quetico Foundation, Nature Conservancy of Canada (Ontario Division),
UJA Federation and Foundation and past Chairman of Baycrest Centre for Geriatric
Care. He also provides servivces as an expert witness and business
valuator. Qualified as an expert and testified before the Federal Court of
Canada (Trial Division), the Supreme Court of Ontario, the Ontario Court
(General Division), Competition Tribunal and other tribunals and panels as
an
expert witness in business valuation, damage quantification and other related
matters
70
John
E. Caldwell
has been
a director of the Company since 2002. Mr. Caldwell is President and Chief
Executive Officer of SMTC Corporation, a publicly held electronics manufacturing
services company whose shares are traded on the Nasdaq National Market and
on
the Toronto Stock Exchange. Mr. Caldwell has served as a director of SMTC since
March 2003 and as President and Chief Executive Officer of SMTC since October
2003. Mr. Caldwell previously was the Chairman of the Restructuring Committee
of
the Board of Mosaic Group Inc., a marketing services provider, from October
2002
to September 2003. Mr. Caldwell was a consultant to GEAC Computer Corporation
Limited, a computer software company, from December 2001 to October 2002 and
was
President and Chief Executive Officer of GEAC from October 2000 to December
2001. Mr. Caldwell served in several roles with CAE Inc., a world leading flight
simulation and training services company, from January 1988 to October 1999,
including President and Chief Executive Officer from June 1993 to October 1999.
Currently, he also serves on the board of directors of ATI Technologies Inc.,
Cognos Inc., IAMGOLD Corporation, Parmalat Canada, Rothmans Inc., and SMTC
Corporation.
Norman
Schipper, Q.C.
has been
a director of the Company since its inception in 1982. From 1962 until his
mandatory retirement as Partner on December 31, 1997, Mr. Schipper was a Partner
in the Toronto office of the law firm of Goodmans, LLP. Since 1998, Mr. Schipper
has been Of Counsel to the firm.
Andre
Julien
has been
a director of the Company since 1986. Mr. Julien retired in 2004. Previously
Mr.
Julien served as President of Chemirco Chemicals, Inc., a privately held company
in Toronto, Canada and as President of LAB Pharmacological Research
International, a privately held company in Montreal Canada. From 1969 until
1994, Mr. Julien was President and owner of Chateau Paints, Inc., a privately
held coatings and paint manufacturer in Montreal, Canada. Mr. Julien is also
a
director of Eterna Trust, a privately held company in Quebec City, Canada,
and
Goodfellow Lumber, Inc., a public company in Montreal, Canada.
Hubert
d’Amours
has been
a director of the Company since 1990. Since 1990, Mr. D’Amours has served as
President of Montroyal Capital, Inc. and Capimont, Inc., two venture capital
investment firms in Montreal, Canada. Mr. d’Amours also serves as a director of
a number of privately held companies.
Board
of Directors
Term
of Directors
The
Board
of Directors is divided into three classes, as nearly equal as possible, with
one class of directors elected each year for a three-year term. The Board
currently consists of eight members: three with terms that expire at the 2006
annual meeting of shareholders, two with terms that expire at the 2007 annual
meeting of shareholders, and two with terms that expire at the 2008 annual
meeting of shareholders. The terms of Simon Raab, Andre Julien, and Hubert
d’Amours will expire at the 2006 annual meeting of shareholders. The terms of
John Caldwell and Norman Schipper, Q.C. will expire at the 2007 annual meeting
of shareholders. The terms of Jay Freeland, Gregory Fraser, and Stephen Cole
will expire at the 2008 annual meeting of shareholders, although Mr. Fraser
has
agreed to resign from the Board upon his retirement from the Company in December
2006.
Committees
The
Board
of Directors has four standing committees: an Audit Committee, an Operational
Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, and a Nominating
Committee.
The
Board
has determined that Norman Schipper, John Caldwell, Hubert d’Amours, Stephen
Cole, and Andre Julien are independent directors under Nasdaq rules. The Board
also has determined that John Caldwell, Stephen Cole, and Hubert d’Amours meet
the additional independence and qualification standards for Audit Committee
members under Nasdaq rules.
71
Audit
Committee
The
Audit
Committee consists of Messrs. d’Amours, Caldwell, and Cole. Mr. Caldwell is the
Chairman of the Audit Committee. The Audit Committee reviews the independence
and qualifications of the Company’s independent public accountants and the
Company’s financial policies, control procedures and accounting staff. The Audit
Committee recommends to the Board the appointment of the independent public
accountants and reviews and approves the Company’s financial statements. The
Audit Committee also reviews transactions between the Company and any officer
or
director or any entity in which an officer or director of the Company has a
material interest. The Audit Committee is governed by a written charter approved
by the Board of Directors. The Board has determined that John Caldwell and
Stephen Cole each qualify as an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined
in the SEC rules. The Board has also determined that both John Caldwell and
Stephen Cole are “independent,” as that term is defined in the SEC rules.
Operational
Audit Committee
In
December 2002, the Board of Directors created an Operational Audit Committee,
and appointed Messrs’ Caldwell and Julien as the members of this committee. The
Operational Audit Committee is responsible for reviewing the operational metrics
of the Company. The operational audit committee meets with department directors
to review progress against goals.
Compensation
Committee
The
Compensation Committee consists of Norman Schipper, John Caldwell, Stephen
Cole,
Hubert d’Amours, and Andre Julien. Mr. Cole currently serves as Chairman of
the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee is responsible for
establishing the compensation of the Company’s directors, officers and other
managerial personnel, including salaries, bonuses, termination arrangements
and
other benefits. In addition, the Compensation Committee administers the
Company’s 1993 Stock Option Plan, 1997 Employee Stock Option Plan, 1997
Non-employee Director Stock Option Plan, 1997 Non-employee Directors’ Fee Plan
and 2004 Equity Compensation Plan.
Nominating
Committee
The
Nominating Committee consists of Norman Schipper, John Caldwell, Stephen Cole,
Huber d’Amours, and Andre Julien.
During
2005, the named executive officers and directors of the Company filed with
the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission”) on a timely basis all
required Forms 3, 4 and 5 pursuant to Section 16 (a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 except as follows: Restricted stock grants received by Hubert
d’Amour, Andre Julien, Norman Schipper, John Caldwell, and Stephen Cole pursuant
to the 2004 Equity Incentive Plan and the final distribution of phantom stock
units to Hubert d’Amour, Andre Julien, and Stephen Cole from the terminated
Non-employee Directors’ Fee Plan in May 2005. Each of these forms subsequently
were filed. The Company has relied on the written representations of its
executive officers and directors and copies of the reports they have filed
with
the Commission in providing this information.
72
Code
of Business Conduct and Ethics
The
Board
of Directors has adopted a Code of Ethics, entitled “Code of Ethics for Senior
Financial Officers,” that is applicable to its principal executive officer,
principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, and
persons performing similar functions. The Board of Directors has also adopted
a
Global Ethics Policy which is applicable to those officers as well as all of
the
Company’s employees. Both the Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers and
the Global Ethics Policy are available on the Internet web site at www.faro.com.
The Company is not including the information contained on or available through
its website as a part of, or incorporating such information by reference into,
this Form 10-K.
73
Item
11.
|
Executive
Compensation.
|
The
following table provides information regarding the compensation awarded or
paid
to, or earned by, our Co-Chief Executive Officers and each of our named
executive officers:
SUMMARY
COMPENSATION TABLE
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Long-Term
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Annual
Compensation
|
Compensation
|
||||||||||||||||||
Shares
|
|||||||||||||||||||
|
Underlying
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
Other Annual
|
Options
|
All
Other
|
|||||||||||||||||
Name
and Postions
|
Year
|
Salary
|
Bonus
(3)
|
Compensation
|
Granted
|
Compensation
|
|||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Simon
Raab
|
2005
|
$
|
398,077
|
$
|
79,615
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Co-Chief
Executive Officer,
|
2004
|
$
|
347,644
|
$
|
200,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Chairman
|
2003
|
$
|
288,000
|
$
|
200,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Jay
Freeland (1)
|
2005
|
$
|
238,492
|
$
|
48,187
|
-
|
40,000
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Co-Chief
Executive Officer,
|
2004
|
$
|
22,115
|
$
|
-
|
-
|
50,000
|
-
|
|||||||||||
President
|
2003
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Barbara
R. Smith (2)
|
2005
|
$
|
169,519
|
$
|
28,038
|
-
|
69,000
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Chief
Financial Officer,
|
2004
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Senior
Vice President
|
2003
|
$
|
-
|
$
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Gregory
A. Fraser
|
2005
|
$
|
234,423
|
$
|
46,885
|
-
|
37,600
|
-
|
|||||||||||
Executive
Vice President
|
2004
|
$
|
218,969
|
$
|
110,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||||
2003
|
$
|
193,000
|
$
|
125,000
|
-
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||||||
The
following table provides information regarding the compensation awarded or
paid
to, or earned by, our Co-Chief Executive Officers and each of our named
executive officers:
_______________________________________
(1) Jay
Freeland was hired on November 15, 2004.
(2) Barbara
R. Smith was hired on February 21, 2005.
(3) Bonuses
are paid after the end of the year based on performance for that year (e.g.,
2005 bonus reflects 2005 performance and is paid in 2006). In previous years,
the Company reported bonuses during the year in which they were paid.
Accordingly, the bonus amounts for 2004 and 2003 have been revised from the
amounts previously reported by the Company.
74
Stock
Option Grants and
Exercises
The
following table sets forth information concerning individual grants of stock
options made during the 2005 fiscal year to each of the named executive
officers:
OPTIONS
GRANTED LAST YEAR
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Potential
Realizable
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Value
at Assumed Annual
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Rates
of Stock Price
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Appreciation
for Option
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Individual
Grants
|
Term
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Number
of
Securities
Underlying
Options
Granted
(#)
|
|
Percentage
of Total Options
Granted
to
Employees
in
2005
|
Exercise
of
Base
Price
($
/ Share)
|
Market
Price
of
Underlying
Security
on
Date
of Grant
|
Expiration
Date
|
5
% ($)
|
10
% ($)
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jay
Freeland
|
40,000
|
12.73
|
19.38
|
19.38
|
12/05/2015
|
487,519
|
1,235,469
|
||||||||||||||||||
Gregory
A. Fraser
|
37,600
|
11.97
|
19.38
|
19.38
|
12/05/2015
|
458,268
|
1,161,341
|
||||||||||||||||||
Barbara
R. Smith
|
30,000
|
9.55
|
19.38
|
19.38
|
12/05/2015
|
365,639
|
926,602
|
||||||||||||||||||
39,000
|
12.42
|
26.68
|
26.68
|
02/21/2015
|
654,397
|
1,658,321
|
Aggregated
Option Exercises in 2005 and Option Values at December 31, 2005
The
following table sets forth information with respect to aggregate stock option
exercises by the named executive officers and the year-end value of unexercised
options held by such executive officers.
|
Number
of
Shares
Acquired
|
Number
of
Unexercised
Options/
SARs
At
FY-End
|
Value
of
Unexercised
In-the-Money
Options/SARs
at
FY-End
($)(1)
|
|||||||||||||
Name
|
on
Exercise
|
Realized
($)
|
(#)
|
Exercisable
|
Unexercisable
|
|||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||
Simon
Raab (2)
|
-
|
-
|
90,000
|
$
|
1,599,300
|
--
|
||||||||||
Jay
Freeland (3)
|
-
|
-
|
90,000
|
$
|
24,800
|
--
|
||||||||||
Barbara
R. Smith (4)
|
-
|
-
|
69,000
|
$
|
18,600
|
--
|
||||||||||
Gregory
A. Fraser (5)
|
-
|
-
|
97,600
|
$
|
1,093,712
|
--
|
(1)
|
Based
on the closing price of $20.00 per share of the Company’s Common Stock on
December 30, 2005 as quoted on The Nasdaq Stock Market.
|
(2)
|
The
90,000 stock option held by Mr. Raab that was granted on May 29,
2002,
expiring on May 29, 2012, is exercisable.
|
(3)
|
The
stock options held by Mr. Freeland include a 50,000 stock option
which was
granted on November 15, 2005, expiring on November 15, 2015, is currently
exercisable and the 40,000 stock option which was granted on December
5,
2005, expiring on December 5, 2015, is currently
exercisable.
|
(4)
|
The
stock options held by Ms. Smith include a 39,000 stock option which
was
granted on February 21, 2005, expiring on February 21, 2015, is currently
exercisable; and the 30,000 stock option which was granted on December
5,
2005, expiring on December 5, 2015, is currently exercisable
|
(5)
|
The
stock options held by Mr. Fraser include a 60,000 stock option which
was
granted on May 27, 2002, expiring on May 27, 2012, is currently
exercisable; and the 37,600 stock option which was granted on December
5,
2005, expiring on December 5, 2015, is currently
exercisable.
|
75
Employment
Agreements
The
Company has entered into employment agreements with each of our co-founders,
Simon Raab and Greg Fraser.
Pursuant
to Mr. Raab’s employment agreement, which was effective January 1, 2006, Mr.
Raab was employed initially as our Chief Executive Officer and served as our
Chairman of the Board and a director. Mr. Raab, pursuant to the employment
agreement, became Co-Chief Executive Officer during 2006 and altered his
full-time commitment to a commitment to no more than 80 hours per month, with
a
corresponding reduction in his salary to $200,000, which is 50% of his previous
salary. The term of Mr. Raab’s employment agreement expires January 1, 2007. If
Mr. Raab remains an employee of the Company after January 1, 2007, the Company
will pay Mr. Raab such amount as the Board of Directors and Mr. Raab agree
is
reasonable based upon his role in the Company. In the event that Mr. Raab does
not remain employed with the Company in 2007, he will continue to receive his
$200,000 annual salary for 2007. Pursuant to Mr. Raab’s employment agreement,
all stock options and RSUs shall vest upon occurrence of the first of the
following events: (a) his death or disability, (b) the termination of his
employment by the Company other than for good cause, (c) the termination of
his
employment for good reason, (d) a change of control, or (e) Board approval
of
any sale, exchange or transfer of all or substantially all of the assets of
the
Company or Board adoption of any plan or proposal for the liquidation or
dissolution of the Company. Mr. Raab is entitled to severance equal to the
continuation of his salary that is then in effect for a period of one year
in
the event that the Company terminates his employment without good cause or
in
the event that Mr. Raab terminates his own employment with good reason prior
to
January 1, 2007. Mr. Raab’s employment agreement contains a five-year
non-compete provision, a two year non-solicitation provision, and
confidentiality and assignment of inventions provisions.
Pursuant
to Mr. Fraser’s employment agreement, which was effective June 28, 2006, Mr.
Fraser was employed as an Executive Vice President and a director at an annual
salary of $245,000. Mr. Fraser will retire from the Company on December 29,
2006. On that date, Mr. Fraser will resign both as an employee and as a member
of the Company’s Board of Directors. In his capacity as an Executive Vice
President, Mr. Fraser will report to the Company’s Co-Chief Executive Officers
and shall have such responsibilities, duties, and authority assigned to him
by
them. Mr. Fraser is entitled to severance equal to the continuation of his
salary through December 29, 2006 in the event that the Company terminates his
employment without good cause or in the event that Mr. Fraser terminates his
own
employment with good reason prior to December 29, 2006. Mr. Fraser’s employment
agreement contains a three-year non-compete provision, a two year
non-solicitation provision, and confidentiality and assignment of inventions
provisions.
Director
Compensation
Generally,
upon election to the Board, the director receives an initial equity grant of
3,400 shares of restricted Common Stock, and then annually on the day following
the annual meeting of shareholders, each director who is not an executive
officer is granted 2,000 shares of restricted Common Stock.
76
Directors
of the Company who are not executive officers are entitled to receive an annual
retainer of $17,850, and fees of $1,875 per board or committee meeting.
Chairpersons of the Audit and Operational Audit Committees receive an additional
annual retainer of $4,000 and the Chairperson of the Compensation Committee
receives an annual retainer of $2,500, and the Chairperson of the Nominating
Committee receives an annual retainer of $1,500. The lead director is entitled
to receive a retainer of $11,500.
In
2005,
non-employee directors earned the following directors’ fees: Messrs. d’Amours
$40,400 Caldwell $57,225, Cole, $50,625, Julien $31,700, and Schipper $32,381.
Mr. Cole, the Company’s lead director did not receive his lead director retainer
for 2005 and, accordingly, will receive both his 2005 and 2006 retainer in
2006.
Compensation
Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation
The
compensation committee consists of Messrs. Hubert d’Amours, Andre Julien, Norman
Schipper, Stephen Cole, and John Caldwell, none of whom has ever been an
employee of the company or any of its subsidiaries. None of the Company’s
executive officers serves as a member of the board of directors or compensation
committee of any entity that has one or more executive officers serving as
members of our board of directors or compensation committee.
77
Item
12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management.
|
Security
Ownership of Management and Principal Stockholders
The
following table sets forth certain information regarding the beneficial
ownership of the Company’s Common Stock as of June 19, 2006 (except as noted) by
each person known to the Company to own beneficially more than five percent
of
the Company’s Common Stock, each director, each nominee for election as a
director, the named executive officers (which are Simon Raab, Jay Freeland,
Barbara Smith, and Greg Fraser), and all executive officers and directors as
a
group.
The
information in the
percentage ownership column in the following table is based on 14,349,726 shares
of common stock outstanding as of June 19, 2006, adjusted as required by rules
promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. To our knowledge, except
as indicated in the footnotes to the following table, the persons named in
this
table have sole voting and investment power with respect to all shares of our
common stock shown as beneficially owned by them.
Beneficial
Ownership Table
Name
of Beneficial Owner
|
Number
of
Shares
|
Percent
|
|||||
Simon
Raab, Ph.D.(1)
|
1,250,552
|
8.7
|
%
|
||||
Gregory
A. Fraser, Ph.D.(2)
|
181,785
|
1.3
|
%
|
||||
Jay
Freeland (3)
|
95,040
|
*
|
|||||
Barbara
R. Smith (4)
|
71,373
|
*
|
|||||
Hubert
d’Amours (5)
|
25,234
|
*
|
|||||
Andre
Julien (6)
|
59,839
|
*
|
|||||
Norman
H. Schipper, Q.C.(7)
|
14,799
|
*
|
|||||
Stephen
R. Cole (8)
|
20,781
|
*
|
|||||
John
Caldwell (9)
|
16,373
|
*
|
|||||
All
directors and executive officers as a group (9 persons)
|
1,735,776
|
12.1
|
%
|
________
*
|
Represents
less than one percent of the Company’s outstanding Common Stock. Except as
otherwise noted, all persons have sole voting and investment power
of the
shares listed.
|
(1)
|
Includes
944,031 shares held by Xenon Research, Inc. (“Xenon”), and includes an
option to purchase 90,000 shares at $2.23 per share that is currently
exercisable. Simon Raab and Diana Raab, his spouse, own all of the
outstanding capital stock of Xenon.“”
|
(2)
|
Includes
options to purchase (i) 60,000 shares at $2.16 per share and (ii)
37,600
shares at $19.38 per share that are currently exercisable.
|
(3)
|
Includes
options to purchase (i) 50,000 shares at $24.35 per share and (ii)
40,000
shares at $19.38 per share that are currently
exercisable.
|
(4)
|
Includes
options to purchase (i) 39,000 shares at $26.68 per share and (ii)
30,000
shares at $19.38 per share that are currently
exercisable.
|
78
(5)
|
Includes
options to purchase (i) 3,000 shares at $3.13 per share, (ii) 3,000
shares
at $2.57 per share, (iii) 3,000 shares at $2.46 per share, (iv) 3,000
shares at $4.42 per share, and (v) 2,000 shares at $21.56 per share
that
are currently exercisable. Does not include an option to purchase
1,000
shares at $21.56 per share that is not exercisable or 3,601 restricted
stock units that have not vested or will not vest within the next
60
days.
|
(6)
|
Includes
options to purchase (i) 3,000 shares at $4.88 per share, (ii) 3,000
shares
at $3.13 per share, (iii) 3,000 shares at $2.57 per share, (iv) 24,000
shares at $2.49 per share, (v) 3,000 shares at $4.42 per share, and
(vi)
2,000 shares at $21.56 per share that are currently exercisable.
Does not
include an option to purchase 1,000 shares at $21.56 per share that
is not
exercisable or 3,601 restricted stock units that have not vested
or will
not vest within the next 60 days.
|
(7)
|
Includes
options to purchase (i) 2,000 shares at $2.21 per share, (ii) 3,000
shares
at $4.42 per share, and (iii) 2,000 shares at $21.56 that are currently
exercisable. Does not include an option to purchase 1,000 shares
at $21.56
per share that is not exercisable or 3,601 restricted stock units
that
have not vested or will not vest within the next 60
days.
|
(8)
|
Includes
options to purchase (i) 3,000 shares at $2.57 per share, (ii) 3,000
shares
at $4.42 per share, and (iii) 2,000 shares at $21.56 per share that
are
currently exercisable. Does not include an option to purchase 1,000
shares
at $21.56 per share that is not exercisable or 3,601 restricted stock
units that have not vested or will not vest within the next 60
days.
|
(9)
|
Includes
options to purchase (i) 3,000 shares at $1.61 per share, (ii) 3,000
shares
at $4.42 per share, and (iii) 2,000 shares at $21.56 per share that
are
currently exercisable Does not include an option to purchase 1,000
shares
at $21.56 per share that is not exercisable or 3,601 restricted stock
units that have not vested or will not vest within the next 60
days.
|
79
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The
following table sets forth information regarding compensation plans under which
equity securities of the Company are authorized for issuance as of December
31,
2005.
Plan
Category
|
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
|
|||||||
Equity
compensation plans approved by security holders
|
1,340,034
|
$
|
16.72
|
803,591
|
||||||
Equity
compensation plans not approved by security holders
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
|||||||
Total
|
1,340,034
|
$
|
16.72
|
803,591
|
Item
13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related
Transactions.
|
The
Company leases its headquarters from Xenon Research, Inc. (“Xenon”), all of the
issued and outstanding capital stock of which is owned by Simon Raab, the
Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer, and Diana Raab, his spouse. The
term of the lease expired on February 28, 2006, and is continuing on a month
to
month basis. The Company expects to renew the lease for an additional 3 - 5
years under similar terms. Base rent under the lease is $398,000 per
year.
Item
14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and
Services.
|
Independent
Public Accountants
Grant
Thornton LLP, independent public accountants, audited the Company’s consolidated
financial statements for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2004 and December
31, 2005. Grant Thornton LLP has been selected by the Audit Committee to serve
as the Company’s independent auditors for the current fiscal year.
Fees
Paid to Grant Thornton LLP :
2004
|
2005
|
||||||||||
Audit
fees
|
(1)
|
$770,000
|
$976,868
|
||||||||
Audit
related fees
|
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||
Tax
fees-preparation and compliance
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||
Total
audit, audit related and tax preparation and
compliance
fees
|
770,000
|
976,868
|
|||||||||
Other
non-audit fees
|
(2)
|
-
|
32,100
|
||||||||
Tax
fees-other
|
|
-
|
-
|
||||||||
All
other fees
|
-
|
-
|
|||||||||
Total
other fees
|
|
-
|
32,100
|
||||||||
Total
fees
|
$770,000
|
$1,008,968
|
80
(1)
|
Audit
of financial statements, reviews of financial statements included
in
Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, and audit of management’s assessment of
the Company’s internal control over financial reporting and the
effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial
reportings.
|
|||||||||
(2)
|
Primarily
fees in connection with the Company’s employee benefit plan audit and Form
S-3 registration statment (File No. 333-110670).
|
The
Audit
Committee has concluded that provision of the audit and permitted non-audit
services described above by Grant Thornton LLP is compatible with maintaining
independence of Grant Thornton LLP.
Pursuant
to the Audit Committee Charter, the Audit Committee pre-approved all of such
services. The Audit Committee has established pre-approval policies and
procedures with respect to audit and permitted non-audit services to be provided
by its independent auditors. Pursuant to these policies and procedures, the
Audit Committee may form, and delegate authority to, subcommittees consisting
of
one or more members when appropriate to grant such pre-approvals, provided
that
decisions of such subcommittee to grant pre-approvals are presented to the
full
Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting. The Audit Committee’s
pre-approval policies do not permit the delegation of the Audit Committee’s
responsibilities to management.
81
PART
IV
Item
15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement
Schedules.
|
(a) Documents
Filed as Part of this Report.
The
following documents are filed as part of this Report:
(1)
Consolidated Financial Statements. Included
in Part II, Item 8 are the consolidated financial statements, the notes thereto
and the report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
(2)
Financial Statement Schedules. Schedule
II - Valuation and Qualifying Accounts is filed as a part hereof along with
the
related report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on the
Company’s financial statement schedule. All other schedules have been omitted
because the information required to be set forth therein is not applicable
or is
included in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.
(3)
Exhibits.
Exhibit No.
|
|
Description
|
3.1
|
|
Articles
of Incorporation, as amended (Filed
as Exhibit 3.1 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1, No.
333-32983, and incorporated herein by reference)
|
3.2
|
|
Bylaws,
as amended (Filed
as Exhibit 3.2 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1, No.
333-32983, and incorporated herein by reference)
|
4.1
|
|
Specimen
Stock Certificate (Filed
as Exhibit 4.1 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1, No.
333-32983, and incorporated herein by reference)
|
10.1
|
|
1993
Stock Option Plan, as amended (Filed
as Exhibit 10.1 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1, No.
333-32983, and incorporated herein by reference)
|
10.2
|
|
1997
Amended and Restated Employee Stock Option Plan (Filed
as Exhibit 4. 2 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8,
No. 333-125021,
and incorporated herein by reference)
|
10.3
|
|
2004
Equity Incentive Plan (Filed
as Exhibit 4.1 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-8, No.
333-125021,
and incorporated herein by reference)
|
10.4
|
|
1997
Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan (Filed
as Exhibit 10.3 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1, No.
333-32983, and incorporated herein by reference)
|
10.5
|
|
1997
Non-Employee Directors Fee Plan (Filed
as Exhibit 10.4 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1, No.
333-32983, and incorporated herein by reference)
|
10.6
|
|
Form
of Patent and Confidentiality Agreement between the Company and each
of
its employees (Filed
as Exhibit 10.10 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form S-1, No.
333-32983, and incorporated herein by reference)
|
10.7
|
|
Agreement
and Plan of Merger dated September 14, 2001, as amended, between
the
Company and SpatialMetriX Corporation (Filed
as Exhibit 2.1 to Registrant’s Current report on Form 8-K dated January
16, 2002 and incorporated herein by reference)
|
82
10.8
|
Securities
Purchase Agreement, dated November 11, 2003, among the Company, Xenon
Research, Inc., a Florida corporation, and Gregory A. Fraser, and
the
investors named on the signature pages thereto.
(Filed as Exhibit 10.1 to Registrant’s Current report on Form 8-K dated
November
11, 2003 and
incorporated herein by reference)
|
|
10.9
|
Loan
Agreement, dated as of September 17, 2003, between the Company and
SunTrust Bank. (Filed
as Exhibit 10.2 to Registrant’s Current report on Form 8-K dated
November
11, 2003 and
incorporated herein by reference)
|
|
10.10
|
Employment
Agreement dated January 30, 2006, by and between the Company and
Simon
Raab (Filed
as Exhibit 10.1 to Registrant’s Current report on Form 8-K dated
January
30, 2006 and
incorporated herein by reference)
|
|
10.11
|
Employment
Agreement dated June 28, 2006, by and between the Company and Gregory
A.
Fraser
|
|
10.12
|
Consulting
Agreement dated June 20, 2006, by and between the Company and Joanne
Karimi
|
|
21.1
|
|
List
of Subsidiaries
|
23.1
|
|
Consent
of Grant Thornton LLP
|
23.2
|
|
Consent
of Ernst & Young LLP
|
24.1
|
|
Power
of Attorney relating to subsequent amendments (included on the signature
page(s) of this report).
|
31-A
|
|
Certification
of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
31-B
|
|
Certification
of the Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
32-A
|
|
Certification
of the Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
32-B
|
|
Certification
of the Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
|
99.1
|
|
Properties
|
83
Schedule
II - Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
Valuation
and Qualifying Accounts were as follows for the three years ended December
31,
2005:
Description
|
Balance
at beginning of period
|
Additions
charged to costs and expenses or revenues
|
Deductions
for purposes for which accounts were set up
|
Balance
at end of period
|
|||||||||
Year
ended December 31, 2005
|
|||||||||||||
Deducted
from assets which apply
|
|||||||||||||
Uncollectible
accounts
|
$
|
339
|
$
|
112
|
$
|
237
|
$
|
214
|
|||||
Reserve
for inventory obsolescence
|
191
|
1,314
|
1,132
|
373
|
|||||||||
Total
|
$
|
530
|
$
|
1,426
|
$
|
1,369
|
$
|
587
|
|||||
Year
ended December 31, 2004
|
|||||||||||||
Deducted
from assets which apply
|
|||||||||||||
Uncollectible
accounts
|
$
|
255
|
$
|
154
|
$
|
70
|
$
|
339
|
|||||
Reserve
for inventory obsolescence
|
155
|
895
|
859
|
191
|
|||||||||
Total
|
$
|
410
|
$
|
1,049
|
$
|
929
|
$
|
530
|
|||||
Year
ended December 31, 2003
|
|||||||||||||
Deducted
from assets which apply
|
|||||||||||||
Uncollectible
accounts
|
$
|
852
|
$
|
140
|
$
|
737
|
$
|
255
|
|||||
Reserve
for inventory obsolescence
|
90
|
905
|
840
|
155
|
|||||||||
Total
|
$
|
942
|
$
|
1,045
|
$
|
1,577
|
$
|
410
|
84
REPORT
OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING
FIRM
To
the
Board of Directors and Shareholders of FARO Technologies, Inc.:
We
have
audited the consolidated financial statements of FARO Technologies, Inc. for
the
year ended December 31, 2003, and have issued our report thereon dated February
20, 2004 (included elsewhere in this annual report). Our audit also included
the
information related to the year ended December 31, 2003, shown in Schedule
II of
this annual report. This schedule is the responsibility of the Company’s
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our
audit.
In
our
opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when considered
in
relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly
in
all material respects the information set forth therein.
/s/
ERNST
& YOUNG LLP
Orlando,
Florida
February
20, 2004
85
SIGNATURES
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.
FARO TECHNOLOGIES, INC. | ||
|
|
|
Date: June 29, 2006 | By: | /s/ Barbara R. Smith |
Barbara R. Smith, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Duly
Authorized Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
|
||
Title |
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. Each person whose signature appears
below
constitutes and appoints SIMON RAAB, and JAY W. FREELAND, and each of them
individually, his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power
of
substitution and revocation, for him and in his name, place and stead, in any
and all capacities, to sign any and all amendments to this Report and to file
the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection
therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said
attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each of them, full power and authority to
do
and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done
in
connection therewith, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could
do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorneys-in-fact
and agents, or either of them, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.
Signature
|
Title
|
Date
|
||
/s/
Simon Raab
|
June
29, 2006
|
|||
Simon
Raab
|
Chairman
of the Board, Co-Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive
Officer),
and Director
|
|||
/s/
Jay W. Freeland
|
June
29, 2006
|
|||
Jay
W. Freeland
|
Co-Chief
Executive Officer, President, Chief Operating Officer (Principal
Executive
Officer), and Director
|
|||
/s/
Barbara R. Smith
|
June
29, 2006
|
|||
Barbara
R. Smith
|
Senior
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
Officer
and Principal Accounting Officer),
|
|||
/s/
Gregory A. Fraser
|
June
29, 2006
|
|||
Gregory
A. Fraser
|
Executive
Vice President, Secretary, and Director
|
|||
/s/
John Caldwell
|
June
29, 2006
|
|||
John
Caldwell
|
Director
|
86
/s/
Hubert d’Amours
|
June
29, 2006
|
||||
Hubert
d’Amours
|
Director
|
||||
/s/
Stephen R. Cole
|
June
29, 2006
|
||||
Stephen
R. Cole
|
Director
|
||||
/s/
Norman H. Schipper
|
June
29, 2006
|
||||
Norman
H. Schipper
|
Director
|
||||
/s/ Andre
Julien
|
June
29, 2006
|
||||
Andre
Julien
|
Director
|
87