TRIO-TECH INTERNATIONAL - Annual Report: 2005 (Form 10-K)
Table of Contents
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
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 June 30, 2005
OR
o | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the Transition Period from ___ to ___
Commission File Number 1-14523
TRIO-TECH INTERNATIONAL
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter)
California | 95-2086631 | |
(State or other jurisdiction of | (I.R.S. Employer | |
incorporation or organization) | Identification Number) | |
14731 Califa Street | ||
Van Nuys, California | 91411 | |
(Address of principal executive offices) | (Zip Code) |
Registrants Telephone Number: 818-787-7000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Name of each exchange | ||
Title of each class | On which registered | |
Common Stock, no par value | AMEX |
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None
None
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 Registrants knowledge, in
the definitive proxy statement incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange
Act Rule 12b-2). Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
The aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates of Registrant, as of
December 31, 2004 was approximately $14.7 million (based upon the last sales price for shares of
Registrants Common Stock as reported by the AMEX on December 31, 2004, the last business day of
the Companys most recently completed second fiscal quarter). Shares of Common Stock held by each
officer, director and holder of 5% or more of the outstanding Common Stock (including shares with
respect to which a holder has the right to acquire beneficial ownership within 60 days) have been
excluded in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination of affiliate
status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.
The number of shares of Common Stock outstanding as of September 12, 2005 was
2,995,992.
TRIO-TECH INTERNATIONAL
INDEX
2
Table of Contents
TRIO-TECH INTERNATIONAL
PART I
NOTE CONCERNING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS
The discussions of Trio-Tech Internationals (the Company) business and activities set forth
in this Form 10-K and in other past and future reports and announcements by the Company may contain
forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and assumptions
regarding future activities and results of operations of the Company. In light of the safe
harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the following factors,
among others, could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in any
forward-looking statement made by or on behalf of the Company: market acceptance of Company
products and services; changing business conditions or technologies and volatility in the
semiconductor industry, which could affect demand for the Companys products and services; the
impact of competition; problems with technology; product development schedules; delivery schedules;
changes in military or commercial testing specifications which could affect the market for the
Companys products and services; difficulties in profitably integrating acquired businesses, if
any, into the Company; risks associated with conducting business internationally and especially in
Southeast Asia, including currency fluctuations and devaluation, currency restrictions, local laws
and restrictions and possible social, political and economic instability; and other economic,
financial and regulatory factors beyond the Companys control. The occurrence of a tsunami in Asia
and Hurricane Katrina in the Southern part of North America had an indirect impact on the Company.
World-wide oil prices increased again right after Hurricane Katrina, which caused companies to
incur higher costs. We believe customers will tighten their spending and the demand for electronic
products and semiconductor equipment will decline. This chain effect will hit the Companys
business gradually in the future. See the discussions elsewhere in this Form 10-K, including under
the heading Certain Risks That May Affect Our Future Results, for more information. In some
cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by the use of terminology such as may, will,
expects, plans, anticipates, estimates, potential, believes, can impact, continue,
or the negative thereof or other comparable terminology.
We undertake no obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect subsequent events,
changed circumstances, or the occurrence of unanticipated events.
ITEM 1 BUSINESS
Trio-Tech International was incorporated in 1958 under the laws of the State of California. As
used herein, the term Trio-Tech or Company or we or us or Registrant includes Trio-Tech
International and its subsidiaries unless the context otherwise indicates. Our mailing address and
executive offices are located at 14731 Califa Street, Van Nuys, California 91411, and our telephone
number is (818) 787-7000.
With more than 47 years dedicated to the semiconductor and related industries, we have applied our
expertise to our global customer base in test services, design, engineering, manufacturing, and
distribution.
General
Trio-Tech International provides third-party semiconductor testing and burn-in services primarily
through its laboratories in Southeast Asia. The Company also designs, manufactures and markets
equipment and systems used in the testing and production of semiconductors at its facilities in
California and Southeast Asia, and distributes semiconductor processing and testing equipment
manufactured by others.
The Company operates in three business segments: Testing Services, Manufacturing and Distribution.
The financial information on the measurement of profit or loss and total assets for the three
segments as well as geographic areas information can be found under managements discussion and
analysis of results of operations and financial conditions, as well as in the financial statements
included in this report. The working capital requirements of the Company are covered under
managements discussion and analysis of business outlook, liquidity and capital resources.
We currently operate four testing facilities, one in the United States and three in Southeast Asia.
These facilities provide customers with a full range of testing services, such as burn-in and
product life testing for finished or packaged components. Subsequent to the end of fiscal 2005, we
decided to close our testing facility in Dublin, Ireland as the operation generated cash flow only
from renting out the property and had not generated cash flow from testing services for the past
three years. This contradicts the Companys objective in running a business. The customers and
employees of the Ireland operation were informed of the closure subsequent to the end of fiscal
2005. In August 2005, the Company established a restructuring plan and estimated that the
reasonable costs for completing the closure of the operation in Dublin would be approximately $450.
Of this total, $350 would be related to one-time severance-related expenses, and the remaining
approximately $100 would be related to
3
Table of Contents
facilities-related expenses. Conversely, we intend to acquire a burn-in testing division in China
dealing with the testing of semiconductor components. We intend to proceed with the acquisition
subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions (including without limitation satisfactory
results from the due diligence examination and the execution of a definitive Sales and Purchase
Agreement).
Our Manufacturing segment manufactures Artic Temperature Controlled Wafer Chucks, which are used
for test, characterization and failure analysis of semiconductor wafers, Wet Process Stations,
which wash and dry wafers at a series of 100 to 300 additional processing steps after the etching
or deposition of integrated circuits, and other microelectronic substrates in what is commonly
called the front-end, or creation of semiconductor circuits. Additionally, we also manufacture
centrifuges, leak detectors, HAST (Highly Accelerated Stress Test) systems and burn-in systems
that are used primarily in the back-end of the semiconductor manufacturing process to test
finished semiconductor devices and electronic components.
Our Distribution segment operates primarily in Southeast Asia. This segment markets and supports
distribution of the Companys own manufactured equipment in addition to distributing complementary
products from other manufacturers that are used by the Companys customers and other semiconductor
and electronics manufacturers. We expanded the distribution business to include a strategic
business unit mainly to serve as a distributor of electronic components to customers.
Company History
1958
|
Incorporated in California. | |
1976
|
The Company formed Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. in Singapore. | |
1984
|
The Company formed the European Electronic Test Center (EETC), a Cayman Islands domiciled subsidiary, to operate a test facility in Dublin, Ireland. | |
1985
|
The Companys Singapore subsidiary entered into a joint-venture agreement, Trio-Tech Malaysia, to operate a test facility in Penang. | |
1986
|
Trio-Tech International listed on the NASDAQ Small Cap market under the symbol TRTC. | |
1988
|
The Company acquired the Rotating Test Equipment Product Line of Genisco Technology Corporation. | |
1990
|
Trio-Tech International acquired Express Test Corporation in California. | |
Trio-Tech Malaysia opened a new facility in Kuala Lumpur. | ||
1992
|
Trio-Tech Singapore opened Trio-Tech Bangkok, Thailand. | |
Trio-Tech Singapore achieved ISO 9002 certification. | ||
1994
|
Trio-Tech Malaysia started a new components assembly operation in Batang Kali. | |
1995
|
Trio-Tech Singapore achieved ISO 9001 certification. | |
1997
|
In November 1997, the Company acquired KTS Incorporated, dba Universal Systems of Campbell, California. | |
1998
|
In September 1998, the Company listed on AMEX under the symbol TRT. | |
2000
|
Trio-Tech Singapore achieved QS 9000 certification. | |
Trio-Tech Malaysia closed its facility in Batang Kali. | ||
2001
|
The Company divested the Rotating Test Equipment Product Line. | |
Trio-Tech Malaysia closed its facility in Kuala Lumpur. | ||
2003
|
Trio-Tech Singapore opened a sales office in China known as Trio-Tech (Suzhou) Co. Ltd. | |
Trio-Tech Malaysia scaled down its facility in Penang. | ||
2004
|
The Company moved its Wet Process Station manufacturing from Campbell, California to Singapore. | |
Trio-Tech Test Services Pte. Ltd. was renamed Universal (Far East) Pte. Ltd. | ||
Trio-Tech Malaysia acquired a burn-in testing division in Petaling Jaya. | ||
2005
|
Trio-Tech Singapore, Trio-Tech Malaysia and Trio-Tech Bangkok achieved ISO 9001 : 2000 certification. | |
Trio-Tech Singapore, Trio-Tech Malaysia and Trio-Tech Bangkok achieved ISO/TS16949 : 2002 certification. |
4
Table of Contents
Background
The Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) president noted that the United States GDP (gross
domestic product) has been an excellent bellwether for the global semiconductor industry. The
Commerce Department reported 2005 second-quarter GDP growth of 3.4 percent an indication of
continued strength in the U.S. economy and a very good sign for the semiconductor industry. The SIA
also reported that most major end markets for microprocessor chips including personal computers,
wireless handsets, automotive applications, and wired communications saw unit sales substantially
above expectations in the second quarter of 2005. Semiconductor manufacturing capacity utilization
rose in the same quarter, and recent reports indicate utilization rates will continue to increase
in the third quarter of 2005.
However, recent reports showed that the demand for high-end semiconductor equipment has slowed
down. Semiconductor Equipment and Materials International (SEMI), the global trade association,
forecasted that following the robust 67.2% market expansion in 2004, the high-end equipment market
will decline 12.1% to $32.6 billion in 2005. Its forecast indicates the market will grow at a
single-digit rate in 2006 but resume double-digit growth over the next two years to reach $44.3
billion in 2008. The regions exhibiting the strongest performance versus last year include Europe,
Korea and North America. Billings were lower compared to this same period last year in Japan,
China and Taiwan.
Testing Services
We own and operate facilities that provide testing services for semiconductor devices and
other electronic components to meet the requirements of military, aerospace, industrial and
commercial applications. Testing services represented approximately 46%, 47% and 45% of net sales
for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
The Company uses its own proprietary equipment for certain burn-in, centrifugal and leak tests, and
commercially available equipment for various other environmental tests. The Company conducts the
majority of its testing operations in Southeast Asia with facilities in Singapore, Malaysia and
Thailand. All of the facilities in Southeast Asia are ISO 9002, QS 9000 and TS 16949 certified.
Subsequent to the fiscal year end the Company decided to close its testing facility in Dublin,
Ireland as the operation did not generate cash operationally for the past three years. The Company
will then exit the Ireland market for the immediate future.
The testing services are used by manufacturers and purchasers of semiconductors and other entities
who either lack testing capabilities or whose in-house screening facilities are insufficient for
testing devices to meet military or certain commercial specifications. Customers use third party
test services to accommodate fluctuations in output or to benefit from economies that can be
offered by third party service providers. For those customers with adequate in-house capabilities,
we offer testing services for their overflow requirements and also provide independent testing
verification services.
Trio-Techs laboratories perform a variety of tests, including stabilization bake, thermal shock,
temperature cycling, mechanical shock, constant acceleration, gross and fine leak tests, electrical
testing, static and dynamic burn-in tests, and vibration testing. The laboratories also perform
qualification testing, consisting of intense tests conducted on small samples of output from
manufacturers who require qualification of their processes and devices.
Manufacturing Products
The Company designs, develops, manufactures and markets equipment for the manufacturing and
testing of semiconductor wafers, devices and other electronic components. Revenue from the sale of
products manufactured by the Company represented approximately 42%, 37% and 22% of net sales for
the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
Front-End Products
Wet Process Stations
Wet Process Stations are used for cleaning, rinsing and drying semiconductor wafers, magnetic
disks, flat panel displays and other microelectronic substrates. After the etching or deposition of
integrated circuits, wafers are typically sent through a series of 100 to 300 additional processing
steps. At many of these process steps, the wafer is washed and dried using Wet Process Stations.
This product line includes manual, semi-automated and automated wet process stations, and features
radial and linear robots, state-of-the-art PC touch-screen controllers and sophisticated scheduling
and control software. The Wet Process Station is currently manufactured in Singapore.
5
Table of Contents
Artic Temperature Controlled Wafer Chucks
The Artic Temperature Controlled Chucks are used for test, characterization and failure analysis of
semiconductor wafers and other components at accurately controlled hot and cold temperatures.
Several models are available with temperature ranges from -65°C to +400°C and in
diameters from 4 to 12 inches. The finished wafer is put through a series of tests using the Artic
Temperature Controlled Chucks in which each separate integrated device on the wafer is tested at
accurately controlled temperatures for functionality. After testing, the wafer is diced or cut
up, and each die is then placed into packaging material, usually plastic or ceramic, with lead
wires to permit mounting onto printed circuit boards. These systems provide excellent performance
to meet the most demanding customer applications. Several unique mechanical design features, for
which patents have been granted, provide excellent mechanical stability under high probing forces
and across temperature ranges.
Back-End Products
Autoclaves and HAST (Highly Accelerated Stress Test) Equipment
We manufacture a range of autoclaves and HAST systems and specialized test fixtures. Autoclaves
provide pressurized, saturated vapor (100% relative humidity) test environments for fast and easy
monitoring of integrated circuit manufacturing processes. HAST equipment, which provides a
pressurized high temperature environment with variable humidity, is used to determine the moisture
resistance of plastic encapsulated devices. HAST provides a fast and cost-effective alternative to
conventional non-pressurized temperature and humidity testing.
Burn-in Equipment and Boards
We manufacture burn-in systems, burn-in boards and burn-in board test systems. Burn-in equipment is
used to subject semiconductor devices to elevated temperatures while testing them electrically to
identify early product failures and to assure long-term reliability. Burn-in testing approximates,
in a compressed time frame, the electrical and thermal conditions to which the device would be
subjected during its normal life.
The Company manufactures the COBIS II burn-in system which offers state-of-the-art dynamic burn-in
capabilities and a Windows-based operating system with full data logging and networking features.
We also offer burn-in boards for our BISIC, COBIS and COBIS II burn-in systems and other brands of
burn-in systems. Burn-in boards are used to mount devices during high temperature environmental
stressing.
The Company developed several new products to complement the burn-in processes, including
semi-automatic (LUBIBM) and automatic burn-in board loaders and unloaders (LUBIB). These products
are designed to perform precise, high-speed transfer of IC packages from the semiconductor holding
tray to the burn-in board, or vice-versa, while maintaining the integrity of the ICs leads.
Burn-in-board cleaning systems (CUBIB) are designed to perform wet or dry cleaning for burn-in
boards and other modular boards.
We build Smart Burn-In (SBI) electrical equipment and System Level Test (SLT) equipment which are
used at the few final stages of testing these microprocessor devices. While providing integrated
burn-in solutions, we presented total burn-in automation solutions to improve products yield,
reduce process downtime and improve efficiency. In addition, the Company developed a cooling
solution for high power heat dissipation semiconductor devices. This solution involves the cooling
or maintaining of the temperature of high power semiconductor devices.
Component Centrifuges and Leak Detection Equipment
Component centrifuges and leak detection equipment are used to test the mechanical integrity of
ceramic and other hermetically sealed semiconductor devices and electronic parts for high
reliability and aerospace applications. The Companys centrifuges spin these devices and parts at
specific acceleration rates, creating gravitational forces (gs) up to 30,000gs, thereby
indicating any mechanical weakness in the devices. Leak detection equipment is designed to detect
leaks in hermetic packaging. The first stage of the test includes pressurizing the devices in a
tracer gas for fine leaks or fluid for gross leaks. The bubble tester is used for gross leak
detection. A visual bubble trail will indicate when a device is defective.
Distribution Activities
The Companys Singapore subsidiary continues to develop its international distribution
division. The distribution operation markets, sells and supports our products in Southeast Asia.
In addition to our own products, this operation also distributes complementary products from other
manufacturers based in the United States, Europe, Japan and other countries. These products are
widely used by high quality and volume production manufacturers in the semiconductor and electronic
industries. The products include environmental chambers, shaker systems, handlers, interface
systems, vibration systems, solderability testers
6
Table of Contents
and other manufacturing products. Revenue from distribution activities represented approximately
12%, 16% and 33% of net sales for the years ended June 30, 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
During fiscal 2005, our Singapore Distribution operations participated in three of Asias most
important events for the electronics manufacturing, semiconductor, materials and services
industries Globaltronics 2004, Global Entrepolis 2004, and Semicon Singapore 2005. These events
created business opportunities for small to medium enterprises to interact with some of the most
successful and innovative companies. We exchanged ideas about the latest and newest innovations,
emerging technology and business opportunities. Participation at these shows placed us in an
international arena where we were able to showcase our Wet Process Station, latest component
products, and our best seller, the Temperature Test Chamber.
Our distribution activities were very much focused on markets in Asia, such as Taiwan, Singapore
and China. We moved quickly to take advantage of Chinas strong economic growth and its robust
development in the electronics manufacturing industries. Many of these major customers had set up
facilities in China and needed test equipment for their quality control. These customers presented
excellent opportunities for Universals test products. With more equipment sold, the need for
after-sales installation, equipment servicing contracts and spare parts became a natural add-on for
Universals field service team. The components division, a newly created strategic business unit,
signed a distributorship agreement with a component manufacturer in Asia to distribute their entire
range of components. We also continued to supply test sockets from an American company specializing
in interconnects.
Product Research and Development
We decreased our research and development costs in our U.S. operation. The Company incurred
research and development costs of $93,000 in fiscal 2005, $117,000 in fiscal 2004 and $121,000 in
fiscal 2003.
Research and development efforts for our U.S. operation will consist of minor product improvements.
The HAST software will be converted to a Windows based operating system and the ARTIC chiller units
will be evaluated for upgrades that are inline with state of the art heat removal and pump
technology.
Marketing, Distribution and Services
The Company markets its products and services worldwide, directly and through independent
sales representatives. We have approximately 8 independent sales representatives operating in the
United States and another 16 in various foreign countries. Of the 24 sales representatives, 3
represent the Distribution segment and the others represent the Manufacturing and Testing segments.
Trio-Techs United States marketing efforts are coordinated from its California location. Southeast
Asia marketing efforts are assigned to its subsidiary in Singapore. The Company advertises its
products in trade journals and participates in trade shows.
Independent testing laboratories, users, assemblers and manufacturers of semiconductor devices,
including many large well-known corporations, purchase the Companys products and services. These
customers depend on the current and anticipated market demand for integrated circuits and products
utilizing semiconductor devices. In fiscal 2005, 2004, and 2003, sales of equipment and services to
our three largest customers (Catalyst Semiconductor, Freescale Semiconductor and Advanced Micro
Devices) accounted for approximately 72.2%, 51.8%, and 49.3%, respectively, of our net revenue. Our
ability to maintain close, satisfactory relationships with our customers is essential to our
stability and growth. The loss of or reduction or delay in orders from our significant customers,
or delays in collecting accounts receivable from our significant customers, could adversely affect
our financial condition and results of operations. During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, the
Company had sales of $2,713,000 (11%), $6,805,000 (26%) and $9,054,000 (35%) to Catalyst
Semiconductor, Freescale Semiconductor and Advanced Micro Devices, respectively. During the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2004, the Company had sales of $2,853,000 (15%) and $7,074,000 (37%) to
Catalyst Semiconductor and Advanced Micro Devices, respectively. During the fiscal year ended June
30, 2003, the Company had sales of $3,468,000 (17%) and $6,904,000 (33%) to Catalyst Semiconductor
and Advanced Micro Devices, respectively.
7
Table of Contents
Backlog
The following table sets forth the Companys backlog at the dates indicated (amounts in
thousands):
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||
2005 | 2004 | |||||||
Manufacturing backlog |
$ | 882 | $ | 3,440 | ||||
Testing service backlog |
7,402 | 4,058 | ||||||
Distribution backlog |
1,099 | 852 | ||||||
$ | 9,383 | $ | 8,350 | |||||
Based upon past experience, the Company does not anticipate any significant cancellations or
renegotiation of sales. If there is any cancellation of a confirmed purchase order, the customer is
required to reimburse the Company for all costs that were incurred. The purchase orders for
manufacturing, testing and distribution require delivery within 12 months from the date of the
purchase order. The Company does not anticipate any difficulties in meeting delivery schedules.
Materials and Supply
The Companys products are designed by its engineers and are assembled and tested at its
facilities in California and Singapore. We purchase all parts, and certain components, from
outside sources for assembly by the Company. We have no written contracts with any of our key
suppliers. As these parts and components are available from a variety of sources, the Company
believes that the loss of any one of our suppliers would not have a material adverse effect on its
business taken as a whole.
Competition
There are numerous testing laboratories in the areas in which the Company operates that
perform a range of testing services similar to those offered by the Company. However, recent
severe competition and attrition in the Asian test and burn-in services industry have reduced the
total number of the Companys competitors. Since the Company has sold and will continue to sell its
products to competing laboratories, and other test products are available from many other
manufacturers, the Companys competitors can offer the same testing capabilities. This equipment is
also available to semiconductor manufacturers and users who might otherwise use outside testing
laboratories, including the Company, to perform environmental testing. The existence of competing
laboratories and the purchase of testing equipment by semiconductor manufacturers and users are
potential threats to the Companys future testing services revenue and earnings. Although these
laboratories and new competitors may challenge the Company at any time, the Company believes that
other factors, including its reputation, long service history and strong customer relationships are
more important than pricing factors in determining the Companys position in the market.
The Distribution segment sells a wide range of testing products. The Company saw that the
equipment, components trading and equipment servicing markets are key growth areas in Asia and
hence focused its marketing on Asia. As the semiconductor equipment industry is highly competitive,
the operation faces stiff price competition if the equipment is sold piecemeal. Thus, Add value
has been a key phrase in the Companys sales mission for the past year. It shall continue to
dominate as the key focal point as we offer integrated solutions which draw on the strengths of our
technical specialists who have undergone intensive training with our vendors. Using Singapore as
the manufacturing base, equipment is brought into Singapore from various vendors, and depending on
customers specific requirements, is tested and system integrated before delivery and installation.
The demand for electronic components was relatively strong in Asia in the second quarter of fiscal
2005. Many Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) customers have been outsourcing for connectors
and specialized sockets. However, as our target customers are mainly multinational contract
manufacturers with a worldwide database of suppliers, the most commonly used components became
extremely price competitive. The components division not only competed against similar products,
but also with the direct online ordering system put in place by the vendors. However, such online
competition is discounted as a minor competitive factor as we offer good credit facilities and
maintain excellent business relationships with our long term customers.
The semiconductor equipment manufacturing industry is highly competitive and most of our
competitors for such equipment are located in Asia. Some of our electronic device manufacturing
customers in Asia increased their capital equipment in order to meet the increase in production
capacity for electronic products. There can be no assurance that competition will not increase or
8
Table of Contents
that the Companys technological advantages may not be reduced or lost as a result of technological
advances by competitors or changes in semiconductor processing technology.
We believe that the principal competitive factors in the manufacturing industry include product
performance, reliability, service and technical support, product improvements, price, established
relationships with customers and product familiarity. The Company makes every effort to compete
favorably with respect to each of these factors. Although the Company has competitors for its
various products, the Company believes its products compete favorably with respect to each of these
factors in the markets in which it operates. The Company has been in business for more than 47
years and has facilities mostly in Asia. The Company believes those factors have combined not only
to help establish long-term relationships with customers but also to allow it to continue to do
business with customers upon their relocation to other regions in which the Company conducts
business.
Patents
Trio-Techs Manufacturing segment holds a United States Patent granted in 1987 in relation to
its pressurization humidity testing equipment. The Company also holds a United States Patent
granted in 1994 on certain aspects of its Artic temperature test systems. In 2000, the Company
filed, and was granted in 2001, a new United States patent (20 years) for several aspects of its
new range of Artic Temperature Controlled Chucks. Although the Company believes these patents are
an integral part of our Manufacturing segment, the capitalized cost of the patents was written off
in fiscal 2002 because of the impairment assessed by our management. This assessment was based on
an examination of the estimated undiscounted future cash flows which were generated by the
subsidiaries where certain long-lived assets (goodwill and certain fixed assets) are used.
In fiscal 2003, 2004 and 2005 the Company did not register any patents within U.S.
It is typical in the semiconductor industry to receive notices from time to time alleging
infringement of patents or other intellectual property rights of others. The Company does not
believe that it infringes on the intellectual property rights of others. However, should any
claims therefore be brought against the Company, the cost of litigating such claims, and any
damages that may result therefore, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial
condition or results of operations.
Employees
As of June 30, 2005 the Company had approximately 14 employees in the United States, 443 in
Southeast Asia and 10 in Ireland for a total of approximately 467 employees. None of the Companys
employees are represented by a labor union. As of June 30, 2005, there were approximately 350
employees in the testing segment, 67 employees in the manufacturing segment, 48 in the distribution
segment and 2 in Corporate. We anticipate that the Ireland operation will be closed before the end
of the first quarter of fiscal 2006 and all the employees be terminated.
ITEM 2 PROPERTIES
At this time, the Company believes that it uses about 74.6% of its fixed property capacity.
The Company also believes that its existing facilities are under-utilized and are adequate and
suitable to cover any sudden increase in the Companys needs in the foreseeable future.
The following table sets forth information as to the location and general character of the
principal Manufacturing and Testing facilities of the Registrant:
Owned (O) | ||||||||
Approx. | or Leased (L) | |||||||
Sq. Ft. | Expiration | |||||||
Location | Principal Use/Segment | Occupied | Date | |||||
14731 Califa Street |
Headquarters/ | 10,000 | (L) Jan. 2008 | |||||
Van Nuys, CA 9l411 |
Testing/Manufacturing | |||||||
Abbey Road |
Testing | 18,400 | (O) *4 | |||||
Deansgrange Co.
|
||||||||
Dublin, Ireland |
||||||||
1004, Toa Payoh North, Singapore
|
Testing | 6,864 | (L) Sept. 2006 | |||||
HEX 07-01/07, |
9
Table of Contents
Owned (O) | ||||||||
Approx. | or Leased (L) | |||||||
Sq. Ft. | Expiration | |||||||
Location | Principal Use/Segment | Occupied | Date | |||||
HEX 03-01/03, |
Testing/Manufacturing | 2,959 | (L) Sept. 2006 | |||||
HEX 03-16/17, |
Testing | 976 | (L) Sept. 2006 | |||||
HEX 01-08/15 |
Testing/Manufacturing | 6,864 | (L) Jan. 2006 *1 | |||||
HEX 01-16/17 |
Testing | 1,983 | (L) Jan. 2006 *1 | |||||
HEX 02-08/10, |
Testing | 2,959 | (L) Aug. 2005*1 | |||||
HEX 02-11/15 |
Testing | 3,905 | (L) Apr. 2008 | |||||
HEX 04-17 |
Testing | 1,006 | (L) May. 2007 | |||||
HEX 04-14/16 |
Testing | 2,929 | (L) May. 2007 | |||||
HEX 03-08/10 |
Testing | 2,959 | (L) May. 2007 | |||||
HEX 01/07-R1/R2 |
Testing | 710 | (L) Sept. 2006 | |||||
1008, Toa Payoh North, Singapore
|
||||||||
HEX 03-01/06, |
Testing | 7,345 | (L) Feb. 2006 *1 | |||||
HEX 03-09/17, |
Logistics/Universal(FE) | 6,099 | (L) Jan. 2006 *1 | |||||
HEX 01-08, |
Transformer Room | 603 | (L) Jun. 2006 *1 | |||||
HEX 07-17/18, |
Testing | 4,315 | (L) Nov. 2006 | |||||
HEX 07-01, |
Testing | 3,466 | (L) Jan. 2007 | |||||
HEX 02-17 |
Universal (FE) | 832 | (L) Jun. 2007 | |||||
HEX 02-15/16 |
Universal (FE) | 1,400 | (L) Jul. 2007 | |||||
HEX 01-09/11 |
Universal (FE) | 2,202 | (L) Jun. 2006 *1 | |||||
HEX 03-07/08 |
Testing | 1,765 | (L) Nov. 2007 | |||||
HEX 01-S3/S4 |
Power Substation | 1,627 | (L) Sept. 2006 | |||||
Plot 1A, Phase 1 |
Subleased | 42,013 | (O) *2 | |||||
Bayan Lepas Free Trade Zone
|
||||||||
11900 Penang |
||||||||
327, Chalongkrung Road, |
Testing | 34,432 | (O) | |||||
Lamplathew, Lat Krabang,
|
||||||||
Bangkok 10520, Thailand |
||||||||
Lot No. B7, Kawasan MIEL |
Vacant | 24,142 | (O) *3 | |||||
Batang Kali, Phase II,
|
||||||||
43300 Batang Kali
|
||||||||
Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia |
||||||||
Lot No. 11A, Jalan SS8/2, |
Testing | 19,334 | (L) Jul. 2007 | |||||
Sungai Way Free Industrial Zone,
|
||||||||
47300 Petaling Jaya,
|
||||||||
Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia |
||||||||
Lot No. 4, Kawasan MIEL |
Testing | 14,432 | (L) Nov. 2007 | |||||
Sungai Way Baru Free Industrial
|
||||||||
Zone, Phase III,
|
||||||||
Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia |
||||||||
No. 5, Xing Han Street, Block B |
Testing | 560 | (L) Sept. 2007 | |||||
#05-01/02, Room 6
Suzhou Industrial Park
China 215021 |
||||||||
Suzhou Industrial Park
|
||||||||
China 215021 |
*1 | With respect to the various leases that expire during fiscal 2006, the Company anticipates that the landlord will offer similar terms on each such lease at renewal and does not believe that material expenses will be incurred. |
*2 | The premises are subleased to a third party. |
10
Table of Contents
*3 | The premises are currently vacant as the tenant has terminated the tenancy agreement in June 2005. The Company plans to lease or sell the property to a third party subsequent to the fiscal year. No agreement as to sale has been entered into nor has any purchaser for the premises been specifically named. | |
*4 | The Company plans to close the Ireland operation and sell the property. No agreement as to sale has been entered into nor has any purchaser for the property been specifically named. |
ITEM 3 LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
The Company is, from time to time, the subject of litigation claims and assessments arising
out of matters occurring in its normal business operations. In the opinion of management,
resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Companys financial
statements.
There are no material proceedings to which any director, officer or affiliate of the Registrant,
any beneficial owner of more than five percent of the Registrants common stock, or any associate
of such person is a party that is adverse to the Registrant or its properties.
There was no litigation relating to environmental action which arose from operations.
ITEM 4 SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
None.
11
Table of Contents
PART II
ITEM 5 MARKET FOR REGISTRANTS COMMON EQUITY, RELATED
STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
The Registrants common stock is traded on the American Stock Exchange under the symbol TRT.
The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the range of high and low sales prices
of our common stock as quoted by AMEX:
Quarter Ended | High | Low | ||||||
Fiscal 2004 |
||||||||
September 30, 2003 |
3.60 | 2.40 | ||||||
December 31, 2003 |
4.25 | 3.24 | ||||||
March 31, 2004 |
4.65 | 3.59 | ||||||
June 30, 2004 |
5.00 | 4.25 | ||||||
Fiscal 2005 |
||||||||
September 30, 2004 |
4.45 | 3.45 | ||||||
December 31, 2004 |
4.98 | 3.25 | ||||||
March 31, 2005 |
5.00 | 3.53 | ||||||
June 30, 2005 |
4.00 | 3.50 |
The Company has never declared any cash dividends on its common stock. Any future determination as
to cash dividends will depend upon the earnings and financial position of the Company at that time
and such other factors as the Board of Directors may deem appropriate. California law prohibits
the payment of dividends if the Company does not have sufficient retained earnings or cannot meet
certain asset to liability ratios. The Company presently intends to sell the real property it owns
in Ireland. However, as of the date of filing of this Annual Report, the Company has not entered
into any agreement or letter of intent with respect thereto and thus does not know whether the
property will be sold or, if so, the purchase price therefor or the net proceeds that may derive
therefrom. Assuming that the Company sells the real property and that there are net proceeds
therefrom, the Company may consider using the net proceeds therefrom for a variety of purposes,
which may (but need not) include payment of a cash dividend. Due to the restrictions on the
payment of dividends under California law, and based on the fact that the Company has no agreement
to sell the property and thus cannot at this time analyze whether or not a dividend would be
advisable or permitted under law, the Company is not able at this time to advise whether or not a
cash dividend may be declared in the foreseeable future and there is no assurance that any dividend
will be declared or paid or, if declared, the amount thereof. Aside from the possibility of the
declaration of a dividend following sale of the Ireland property as described in this paragraph, it
is anticipated that no dividends will be paid to holders of common stock in the foreseeable future.
As of September 12, 2005, the Company had approximately 182 holders of its Common Stock.
The following table sets forth as of June 30, 2005, certain information regarding equity
compensation plans of the Company:
12
Table of Contents
EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN INFORMATION | ||||||||||||
Plan Category | Number of | Weighted-average | Number of | |||||||||
securities to be | exercise price of | securities | ||||||||||
issued upon | outstanding options | remaining available | ||||||||||
exercise of | for future issuance | |||||||||||
outstanding options | under equity | |||||||||||
compensation plans | ||||||||||||
(excluding | ||||||||||||
securities | ||||||||||||
reflected in column | ||||||||||||
(a)) | ||||||||||||
(a) | (b) | (c) | ||||||||||
Equity compensation plans
approved by security holders: |
||||||||||||
(1) Companys 1988
Stock Option Plan |
165,000 | $ | 3.44 | 135,000 | ||||||||
(2) Directors Stock
Option Plan |
137,000 | $ | 3.63 | 163,000 | ||||||||
Equity compensation plans not
approved by security holders: |
0 | $ | 0.00 | 0 | ||||||||
Total |
302,000 | $ | 3.53 | 298,000 | ||||||||
13
Table of Contents
ITEM 6 SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
(In thousands, except Earnings (Loss) per share)
(In thousands, except Earnings (Loss) per share)
June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | 2002 | 2001 | ||||||||||||||||
Consolidated Statements of Operations |
||||||||||||||||||||
Net sales |
$ | 25,694 | $ | 19,154 | $ | 21,246 | $ | 19,617 | $ | 36,133 | ||||||||||
Income (loss) from operations |
246 | 36 | (287 | ) | (3,579 | ) | 1,383 | |||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
221 | 220 | (81 | ) | (3,547 | ) | 1,163 | |||||||||||||
Earnings (loss) per share : |
||||||||||||||||||||
Basic |
0.07 | 0.07 | (0.03 | ) | (1.21 | ) | 0.40 | |||||||||||||
Diluted |
0.07 | 0.07 | (0.03 | ) | (1.21 | ) | 0.39 | |||||||||||||
Weighted average common
shares outstanding |
||||||||||||||||||||
Basic |
2,968 | 2,939 | 2,928 | 2,928 | 2,884 | |||||||||||||||
Diluted |
2,992 | 3,000 | 2,928 | 2,928 | 3,006 | |||||||||||||||
Consolidated Balance Sheets |
||||||||||||||||||||
Current assets |
$ | 10,645 | $ | 12,313 | $ | 11,493 | $ | 13,405 | $ | 15,501 | ||||||||||
Current liabilities |
5,836 | 5,624 | 5,050 | 6,918 | 8,014 | |||||||||||||||
Working capital |
4,809 | 6,689 | 6,443 | 6,487 | 7,487 | |||||||||||||||
Total assets |
18,345 | 18,000 | 16,711 | 19,075 | 24,150 | |||||||||||||||
Long-term debt and
capital leases |
744 | 793 | 836 | 986 | 1,745 | |||||||||||||||
Shareholders equity |
$ | 9,297 | $ | 9,024 | $ | 8,590 | $ | 8,618 | $ | 11,609 |
14
Table of Contents
ITEM 7 MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PERCENTAGES AND SHARE AMOUNTS)
The discussions of Trio-Tech Internationals (the Company) business and activities set forth
in this Form 10-K and in other past and future reports and announcements by the Company may contain
forward-looking statements within meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and assumptions regarding
future activities and results of operations of the Company. In light of the safe harbor
provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, the following factors, among
others, could cause actual results to differ materially from those reflected in any forward-looking
statement made by or on behalf of the Company: market acceptance of Company products and services;
changing business conditions or technologies and volatility in the semiconductor industry, which
could affect demand for the Companys products and services; the impact of competition; problems
with technology; product development schedules; delivery schedules; changes in military or
commercial testing specifications which could affect the market for the Companys products and
services; difficulties in profitably integrating acquired businesses, if any, into the Company;
risks associated with conducting business internationally and especially in Southeast Asia,
including currency fluctuations and devaluation, currency restrictions, local laws and
restrictions, and possible social, political and economic instability; and other economic,
financial and regulatory factors beyond the Companys control. See the discussions elsewhere in
this Form 10-K for more information. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by
the use of terminology such as may, will, expects, plans, anticipates, estimates,
potential, believes, can impact, continue, or the negative thereof or other comparable
terminology.
We undertake no obligation to update forward-looking statements to reflect subsequent events,
changed circumstances, or the occurrence of unanticipated events.
Overview
Trio-Tech International provides third-party semiconductor testing and burn-in services
primarily through its laboratories in Southeast Asia. The Company operates in three distinct
segments: Sales, Manufacturing, and Testing. At or from its facilities in California and Southeast
Asia, the Company also designs, manufactures and markets equipment and systems used in the testing
and production of semiconductors, and distributes semiconductor processing and testing equipment
manufactured by others.
(i) Results of operations and business outlook
The following table sets forth our revenue components for the past three fiscal years:
Revenue Components
Year Ended | ||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||
Net Sales: |
||||||||||||
Manufacturing |
41.57 | % | 37.18 | % | 22.00 | % | ||||||
Testing |
46.47 | 46.50 | 44.74 | |||||||||
Distribution |
11.96 | 16.32 | 33.26 | |||||||||
Total |
100.00 | % | 100.00 | % | 100.00 | % | ||||||
Geographically, we operate in the U.S., Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand and Ireland. Our customers
are mainly concentrated in Southeast Asia and they are either semiconductor chip manufacturers or
testing facilities that purchase our testing equipment.
The Testing segment remained our core segment and largest producer in the Company, making up 46.5%
of the total net sales the last two fiscal years. The Manufacturing segment sales went from 37.18%
of total net sales in fiscal 2004 to 41.57% in fiscal 2005, with the majority of the hike in sales
occurring in the first half of fiscal 2005. Distribution sales, as a percentage of sales, declined
as overall sales increased by 34.1% compared to fiscal 2004.
The Company believes the current market trend indicates that most major end markets for
semiconductors, such as electronic consumer products in Asia, are on the uptrend. According to
Semiconductor Industry Association, the communications revolution
will drive the semiconductor industry to new heights. There will be increased demand for
microprocessor chips, which will be used in wireless handsets, automotive applications and wired
communications, as indicated by increased unit sales of these products in the second quarter of
2005.
15
Table of Contents
Because of the increase in Manufacturing segment sales, the Testing segment sales as a percentage
of total net sales remained the same level from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005, even though the Testing
segment experienced an increase in burn-in services in Southeast Asia. During fiscal 2005, we
acquired a burn-in testing operation in Malaysia, which began operating at the beginning of the
2005 fiscal year, in order to capture additional market share in the Asian region.
The Company allocated the purchase price of the newly acquired burn-in division in Malaysia to the
tangible assets and intangible assets acquired based on their estimated fair values. The fair value
assigned to intangible assets acquired was based on estimates and assumptions determined by the
management. Other intangibles with finite lives are amortized on a straight-line basis over their
respective useful lives. The total purchase price was allocated as follows (in thousands):
Total purchase price: |
||||
Cash |
$ | 823 | ||
Notes payable |
395 | |||
$ | 1,218 | |||
Allocated as follows: |
||||
Fixed assets |
||||
-Machinery and equipment |
$ | 729 | ||
-Leasehold improvements |
7 | |||
736 | ||||
Intangible assets customer relationship |
482 | |||
$ | 1,218 | |||
The excess purchase price over the fair value of tangible assets acquired was attributable to the
customer relationship obtained from the aforementioned business acquisition and recorded as other
intangible assets. No goodwill is recognized in this context. The customer relationship intangible
will be amortized over its economic life based on the contract term as stated in the sales
agreement with the customer on a straight-line method over five years.
The value of customer relationship was originally presented as $493 in our Form 8-K. After further
identification conducted after July 1, 2004, the Company found that a value of approximately $11
from equipment was included in this $493. Consequently, a reclassification was made to present the
proper value of $482 for the customer relationship, which was started to be amortized over five
years from July 1, 2004.
In fiscal 2005, the Company converted some of its plants in Southeast Asia to accommodate testing
of the new, faster type of microprocessor chips to meet the increased demand for such products. In
addition, all the Testing operations in Southeast Asia were recently certified with ISO 9002,
QS9000 and TS 16949, which we believe will boost burn-in services in Southeast Asia. Backlog in
the Malaysia and Singapore Testing operations increased by 82.4% to $7,402 at the end of fiscal
year 2005 from $4,058 at the end of fiscal 2004 due to the ramping up of testing services for
faster speed microprocessor chips. A tenant vacated our property at Batang Kali in Malaysia during
June 2005 without paying two months rental of $6. The Company plans to sell or lease the property,
otherwise the Company will lose approximately $3 rental income per month if the property remain
vacant.
The Manufacturing segment sales as a percentage of total sales increased by 4.39% from fiscal 2004
to fiscal 2005. The demand for the Companys burn-in systems increased concurrently with the
demand for more microprocessor chips in Asia, and the increase in burn-in boards sales derived from
a new customer. This benefited the Singapore Manufacturing operation, especially in the first half
of fiscal 2005. Localization programs, in which governments strongly encourage customers to
purchase from their same region, are being implemented in several different countries and as a
result few customers are willing to continue to procure from their overseas vendors. Being an
overseas vendor, we believe we may loose some sales to our customers local vendors, as customers
have already begun to hold back their orders. As a result, the backlog in the Manufacturing
operation in Southeast Asia dropped by $2,479 from $3,286 in fiscal 2004 to $807 in fiscal 2005.
The Manufacturing operation in the U.S. will continue to market used and refurbished equipment.
The Distribution segment sales as a percentage of net total sales declined by 4.36% from fiscal
2004 to fiscal 2005. Sales in the U.S. have yet to improve, therefore the Company focused its
marketing effort on Asia. The Singapore distribution operations will be focusing on selling Wet
Process Stations mainly to research institutions and local universities, as well as working closely
with their vendors to manufacture a plating system which will be used in the electronics,
telecommunications, automotive and aerospace industries. Equipment and electronic component sales
are very competitive, as the products are widespread in the market. Pressure from cost conscious
consumers to lower prices translates throughout the supply chain, which means efficiency
16
Table of Contents
and productivity are of utmost importance. The backlog in the Distribution segment increased by
$247 to $1,099 as of June 30, 2005 as our Singapore Distribution operation closed some orders on
Vibration equipment and Wet Process Stations during the end of the 2005 fiscal year.
Key performance indicators for the Company are based on market demand. Sales activities (such as
bookings and backlog), queries on products, customers forecasts and the financial results of
customers and competitors formed part of our performance indicators. According to data in the SEMS
Report, worldwide semiconductor equipment sales reached $17 billion for the first six months of
2005, or approximately 8.2% below the first six months of 2004. Europe, Korea and North America
continued to exhibit stronger performances over the first six months of 2005, while Japan, China
and Taiwan billings for wafer processing equipment declined by 10.4%, 61.7% and 17.1% respectively,
when compared to the same period last year. Semiconductor equipment sales in the North American
market seem to be recovering. The SEMI book-to-bill ratio dropped to 0.78 in January 2005 but
returned to 0.93 in June 2005, the same as 2004.
There are several influencing factors which create uncertainties when forecasting performance, such
as the ever-changing nature of technology, including specific requirements from the customer,
decline in demand for certain types of burn-in devices or equipment, and other similar factors.
One of these factors is the highly competitive nature of the semiconductor industry. Another is
that some customers are unable to provide a forecast of the products required in the upcoming
weeks, hence it is difficult to plan out the resources needed to meet these customers requirements
due to short lead time and last minute order confirmation. This will normally result in a lower
margin for these products, as it is more expensive to purchase materials in a short time frame.
However, the Company has taken action to protect itself and has formulated plans for dealing with
these unpredictable factors. For example, in order to meet customers demands on short notice the
Company maintains higher inventories, but continues to work closely with its customers to avoid
stock piling. We continue to cut costs by remaining economic in scale and maintaining a lean
headcount, while still keeping quality high so as to sell new products at a competitive price. We
have also been improving customer service from staff by keeping them up to date on the newest
technology and stressing the importance of understanding and meeting the stringent requirements of
our customers. Furthermore, we subcontract certain areas of manufacturing functions to ease
supervisory and administrative work. Finally, the Company is exploring new markets and products,
looking for new customers, and upgrading and improving burn-in technology while at the same time
searching for alternatives to burn-in.
(ii) Financial information
During the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, total assets increased by $345 from $18,000 at June 30,
2004 to $18,345 at June 30, 2005. The majority of the increase was in accounts receivables, other
intangible assets, and property, plant and equipment, but offset with a decrease in short term
deposits of $2,438. Though the bulk of the movements in the aforementioned assets derived from the
Testing segment, the overall assets of this segment did not increase substantially. The decrease in
short term deposits was inversely related to the increase in the rest of the assets. The total
assets in the Manufacturing segment decreased with the decline in accounts receivable as its sales
surged from Q4 of fiscal 2004 to Q2 of fiscal 2005. On the other hand, the accounts receivables in
the Distribution segment increased due to higher sales in Q4 of fiscal 2005 as compared to the same
period last year, with no major decline in other assets. Hence, the rise in total assets was
attributable mainly from the Distribution segment.
The increase in accounts receivables from $3,695 at June 30, 2004 to $4,178 at June 30, 2005 was
mainly attributable to the higher sales from the Distribution and Testing operations in Southeast
Asia in Q4 of fiscal 2005 as compared to Q4 of fiscal 2004. Sales for all operations during fiscal
2005 were $25,694, which increased by 34.1% as compared to the sales during fiscal 2004. At the
same time, the operations in Southeast Asia improved their efficiency in collection, especially
after the Malaysia Testing operation synchronized its billing function with its customers, which
resolved some of the long outstanding debts. The collection period for the company was shortened
from an average of 70 days at June 30, 2004 to an average of 56 days at June 30, 2005.
The Company recognized $482 as of July 1, 2004 in other intangible assets for the customer
relationship intangible, which will be amortized over five years. The amortization expense of the
customer relationship intangible was $96 during fiscal 2005. Consequently, the remaining balance of
the customer relationship intangible amounted to $386 at June 30, 2005.
Property, plant and equipment increased by $1,974 from $5,202 at June 30, 2004 to $7,176 at June
30, 2005 mainly due to the acquisition of fixed assets by the Testing segment in Southeast Asia.
During fiscal 2005, additions to property, plant and equipment totaled $3,426, of which $360 was
paid as a deposit before June 30, 2004, but the renovation was completed and equipment was received
in the first quarter of fiscal 2005. $736 of the additions were due to the acquisition of fixed
assets located in the new burn-in operation in Malaysia and $740 and $317 were related to the
purchases of new plant and machinery, and renovation of the new plant in Malaysia to meet the
customers requirements, respectively. In addition, we converted three of the existing facilities
in the Singapore Testing operation at a cost of $758 in order to handle the burn-in process of the
new type of microprocessor chips. Other fixed asset purchases included office equipment and
machinery by the Singapore and Thailand operations.
17
Table of Contents
The drop in short-term deposits, which decreased by $2,438 from $5,649 at June 30, 2004 to $3,211
at June 30, 2005 was due to several reasons. The total acquisition costs of the burn-in operation
in Malaysia, which amounted to $1,218, were fully paid by December 31, 2004 through internal
funding. In addition, more plant and machinery and renovation, in the amount of $350 and $317
respectively, were purchased to meet the customers requirement; $129 was placed as a deposit for
the rental of the factory and utilities with the landlord and utilities vendor in the Malaysia
operation. The existing Malaysia operation paid out dividends of $53 to its minority interest,
which was declared out of retained earnings for the year ended June 30, 2004. There was a payment
of annual wages, salaries and performance incentives of $243 during fiscal 2005 in the Singapore
and Malaysia operations. The Company also made payments of $110 for fiscal 2004 audit during
fiscal 2005. In addition, the Singapore and Ireland operations and Corporate paid taxes of $95,
$36 and $3, respectively, during fiscal 2005, which were offset by a tax refund of $121 in the
Singapore and Malaysia operations after the tax assessments for prior years were finalized.
Total liabilities at June 30, 2005 were $6,987, reflecting a $121 increase from $6,866 at June 30,
2004. This was mainly due to the increase in line of credit, accrued expenses and income tax
payable, offset with the decrease in accounts payable of $635.
One of our lines of credit increased by $190 due to the financing obtained by the Singapore
operations in the normal course of business. Income tax payable also increased by $119, mainly
attributable to the Singapore operations for the increase in taxable income, to a profit of $561 in
fiscal 2005 from a loss of $61 in fiscal 2004.
Accrued expenses increased by $432, mainly attributable to the Singapore and Malaysia operations.
In the Singapore operation there was a higher provision for warranty of $26 due to higher equipment
sales and an increase in commissions of $51 due to a greater number of commissionable sales, final
outstanding balances for fixed assets purchase of $108, higher sales tax of $17 and accrued
purchases of $14 at June 30, 2005. This was partially offset with lower accrued utilities of $42,
as payments were made by June 30, 2005 after the Company changed its fiscal report period to end on
the last day of the fiscal year. In the Malaysia operation there was an increase in accrual of
payroll for contract workers of $96, performance incentives of $30 for employees who previously
worked for the Seller of the burn-in operation, payroll related costs of $5, final outstanding
balances for fixed assets purchases of $33 and higher accrued utilities of $28 for the newly
acquired operation at June 30, 2005, while none was accrued in June 30, 2004. There was also
unearned revenue of $123 in one of the U.S. operations, as the sale of a Wet Process Station did
not meet our revenue recognition policy. In addition, the accrual for fiscal 2005 annual audit
fees of $60 was reversed as the services have not been provided.
Accounts payable decreased by $635 since June 30, 2004 due mainly to fewer materials purchased in
the Singapore Manufacturing operation proportionally with its lower backlog. This offset the higher
purchase of raw materials by $211 in the Singapore Distribution operation.
As of June 30, 2005, total liabilities (excluding minority interest) were 75.4% of total capital,
compared with 76.1% at June 30, 2004. Total liabilities as a percentage of total capital were lower
in fiscal 2005 mainly due to lower accounts payable as mentioned earlier.
Critical Accounting Estimates & Policies
We prepare the consolidated financial statements in accordance with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America. The preparation of these financial statements
require the use of estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial
statements and the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the reporting period.
Management periodically evaluates the estimates and judgments made. Management bases its estimates
and judgments on historical experience and on various factors that are believed to be reasonable
under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from these estimates as a result of different
assumptions or conditions.
In response to the SECs Release No. 33-8040, Cautionary Advice Regarding Disclosure About
Critical Accounting Policy, the Company identified the most critical accounting principles upon
which its financial status depends. The Company determined that those critical accounting
principles are related to the use of estimates, inventory valuation, revenue recognition, income
tax and impairment of intangibles and other long-lived assets. The Company states these accounting
policies in the relevant sections in this managements discussion and analysis, including the
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements discussed below.
Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
During the normal course of business, we extend unsecured credit to our customers. Typically,
credit terms require payment to be made between 30 to 60 days of the sale. We do not require
collateral from our customers. We maintain our cash accounts at credit worthy financial
institutions.
18
Table of Contents
We regularly evaluate and monitor the creditworthiness of each customer on a case-by-case basis.
We include any account balances that are determined to be uncollectible, along with a general
reserve, in the overall allowance for doubtful accounts. After all attempts to collect a
receivable have failed, the receivable is written off against the allowance. Based on the
information available to management, we believe that our allowance for doubtful accounts was
adequate as of June 30, 2005.
Inventory Valuation
Our inventories are stated at the lower of cost (on a first-in, first-out basis) or market value.
Our industry is characterized by rapid technological change, short-term customer commitments and
rapid changes in demand. We make provisions for estimated excess and obsolete inventory based on
our regular reviews of inventory quantities on hand and the latest forecasts of product demand and
production requirements from our customers. We write down inventories for not saleable, excess or
obsolete raw materials, works-in-process and finished goods by charging such write-downs to cost of
sales. In addition to write-downs based on newly introduced parts, statistics and judgments are
used for assessing provision of the remaining inventory based on salability and obsolescence.
Revenue Recognition
Revenue from sales of the Companys products is recognized upon shipment or delivery, depending
upon the terms of the sales order, provided that persuasive evidence of a sales arrangement exists,
title and risk of loss have transferred to the customer, the sales amount is fixed and determinable
and collection of the revenue is reasonably assured. We allocate a portion of the invoice value to
products sold and the remaining portion of invoice value to installation work in proportion to the
fair value of products sold and installation work to be performed. The fair value determination of
products sold and the installation and training work is also based on our specific historical
experience of the relative fair values of the elements if there is no easily determinable market
price to be considered. A portion of the Companys sales is contributed from testing
services. Revenue derived from testing service is recognized when testing services are rendered.
The Company reduces revenue based on estimates of future credits to be granted to customers.
Credits are granted for reasons such as product returns due to quality issues, volume-based
incentives, and other special pricing arrangements.
Income Tax
In determining income for financial statement purposes, the Company must make certain estimates and
judgments in the calculation of tax expense and the resultant tax liabilities and in the
recoverability of deferred tax assets that arise from temporary differences between the tax and
financial statement recognition of revenue and expense.
In the ordinary course of global business there may be many transactions and calculations
where the ultimate tax outcome is uncertain. The calculation of tax liabilities involves dealing
with uncertainties in the application of complex tax laws. Our foreign subsidiaries are subject to
income taxes in the regions where they operate. Because of the different income tax jurisdictions,
net losses generated in the U.S. cannot be utilized to offset the taxable income generated in
foreign countries. Therefore, we may incur certain income tax expenses in any fiscal year though
the Company may generate lower income before income taxes. Although the Company believes the
estimates are reasonable, no assurance can be given that the final outcome of these matters will
not be different than what is reflected in the historical income tax provisions and accruals.
As part of its financial process, the Company must assess the likelihood that its deferred tax
assets can be recovered. If recovery is not likely, the provision for taxes must be increased by
recording a reserve in the form of a valuation allowance for the deferred tax assets
that are estimated not to be ultimately recoverable. In this process, certain relevant criteria
are evaluated including the existence of deferred tax liabilities that can be used to absorb
deferred tax assets, the taxable income that can be used to absorb net operating losses and credit
carrybacks, and taxable income in future years. The Companys judgment regarding future
profitability may change due to future market conditions, changes in U.S. or international tax laws
and other factors. These changes, if any, may require material adjustments to these deferred tax
assets and an accompanying reduction or increase in net income in the period when such
determinations are made.
In addition to the risks described above, the effective tax rate is based on current enacted
tax law. Significant changes during the year in enacted tax law could affect these estimates.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
We review long-lived assets for impairment when certain indicators are present that suggest the
carrying amount may not be recoverable. This review process primarily focuses on other intangible
assets from business acquisitions and property, plant and equipment. Factors considered include
the under-performance of a business compared to expectations and shortened useful lives due to
planned changes in the use of the assets. Recoverability is determined by comparing the carrying
amount of long-lived assets to estimate future undiscounted cash flows. If future undiscounted
cash flows are less than the carrying amount of the
19
Table of Contents
long-lived assets, an impairment charge would be recognized for the excess of the carrying amount
over fair value determined by either a quoted market price, if any, or a value determined by
utilizing a discounted cash flow technique. Additionally, in the case of assets that will continue
to be used by the Company in future periods, a shortened life may be utilized if appropriate,
resulting in accelerated amortization or depreciation based upon the expected net realizable value
of the asset at the date the asset will no longer be utilized by the Company. Actual results may
vary from estimates due to, among other things, differences in operating results, shorter asset
useful lives and lower market values for excess assets.
Results of Operations
Year Ended June 30, 2005 (2005) Compared to June 30, 2004 (2004)
The following table sets forth certain consolidated statements of income data as a percentage
of net sales for fiscal years 2005 and 2004, respectively:
2005 | 2004 | |||||||
Net Sales |
100.0 | % | 100.0 | % | ||||
Cost of Sales |
76.0 | % | 75.5 | % | ||||
Gross Margin |
24.0 | % | 24.5 | % | ||||
Operating Expenses |
||||||||
General and administrative |
18.3 | % | 19.7 | % | ||||
Selling |
4.1 | % | 4.6 | % | ||||
Research and development |
0.4 | % | 0.6 | % | ||||
Impairment Loss |
0.3 | % | 0.0 | % | ||||
Loss (Gain) on disposal of PP&E |
0.0 | % | -0.5 | % | ||||
Total Operating Expenses |
23.1 | % | 24.4 | % | ||||
Income from operations |
0.9 | % | 0.1 | % | ||||
Overall Net Sales and Gross Margin
Overall net sales for fiscal 2005 were $25,694, up 34.1% from net sales of $19,154 in fiscal 2004.
The growth in net sales was primarily due to an increased demand for our Manufacturing products and
Testing services. The bulk of the net sales were generated from customers in Asia due to the
uptrend in the market for electronic consumer products in this region, whereas there was a slow
recovery in capital spending in the U.S. The sales mix in the Distribution segment followed the
same trend.
The overall gross margin declined slightly from 24.5% in fiscal 2004 to 24.0% in fiscal 2005. The
erosion in the margin was the result of a surge in sales for low-margin burn-in boards, which
caused the group margin to slide 0.5% compared to last fiscal year. In addition, inventory
totaling $33 was written off in the U.S. Manufacturing operation due to obsolescence. The decline
in overall gross margin from the Manufacturing segment was partially offset by the increased
margins in the Testing and Distribution segments, which were the result of many factors to be
further explained later.
Manufacturing Segment
The revenue and gross margin for the Manufacturing segment for fiscal years 2005 and 2004 were as
follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2005 | 2004 | ||||||
Revenue |
$ | 10,681 | $ | 7,122 | ||||
Gross margin |
15.6 | % | 19.3 | % |
Net sales in the Manufacturing segment increased by 50% from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005. The
increase was due in part to increased sales of burn-in systems, which improved by $662 with a 47.4%
increase in quantity sold and a drop in average unit selling price of 13.3%, and increased sales of
burn-in boards by $3,954, a 234.7% spike in quantity sold and a 14.5% rise in average unit selling
price. Some of our electronic device manufacturing customers increased their capital equipment in
order to meet their increase in production capacity. The personal computer market is expanding in
Asia leading to greater demand for electronic components. The increase in sales of burn-in boards
derived from newly acquired customers in this region whom the Company had been pursuing for some
time. However, these factors were offset by lower sales of Artic Temperature Controlled Chucks,
Environmental Test Equipment and Wet Process Stations. Sales of Artic Temperature Controlled
Chucks dropped by
20
Table of Contents
$100 from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005, with a decrease of 66.7% in quantity sold and an increase of
54.4% in average unit selling price. Environmental Test Equipment sales declined by $96 from
fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005, with a 30% increase in quantity sold but a 50.5% decrease in the
average unit selling price. Sales for both of these items were affected by cautious spending in
the U.S. due to inventory adjustments on capital equipment in the distribution channel, which in
turn affected the manufacturing of equipment in the U.S. operation. Sales of Wet Process Stations
of $1,003 from fiscal 2004 primarily came from Universal Systems. This Manufacturing operation in
San Jose, California was moved to Singapore in fiscal 2004 due to high manufacturing costs in the
U.S. The Singapore distribution personnel were trained to manufacture. Wet Process Stations at
that time. During fiscal 2005, a Wet Process Station was delivered to the customer but the Company
was unable to recognize the sale as it did not meet our revenue recognition policy (SAB104).
Therefore, no Wet Process Stations were sold in fiscal 2005.
The gross margin in the Manufacturing segment decreased by 3.7%, even though sales increased by 50%
compared to fiscal 2004. The hike in sales of burn-in boards was not enough to raise the overall
gross margin, and the same was true for the hike in quantity sold of burn-in systems though their
price had lowered. However, the Company wishes to continue to manufacture low-margin burn-in
boards in order to maintain market share. Sales by the Manufacturing segment in the U.S. dropped
by 67.4% from $2,883 in fiscal 2004 to $940 in 2005, but the cost of sales, which include fixed and
semi-fixed costs, did not decrease proportionately due to the fact that the operation was already
operating at minimal cost. Additionally, the U.S. operation had to write off $33 in inventory due
to obsolescence.
Testing Segment
The revenue and gross margin for the Testing segment for fiscal years 2005 and 2004 were as follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2005 | 2004 | ||||||
Revenue |
$ | 11,940 | $ | 8,908 | ||||
Gross margin |
31.6 | % | 29.2 | % |
The Testing segment net sales increased by $3,032, or 34%, from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005. The
bulk of the sales increase was in our newly acquired burn-in operation in Malaysia, which accounted
for approximately 16.6% of total burn-in services. Although the Singapore Testing operation
experienced a change in services mix, the high demand for testing of the new type of microprocessor
chips was more than enough to make up for the drop in sales volume for testing of the slower speed
microprocessor chips. Customers changed their requirements, which resulted in a lower average unit
selling price for many of our products. However, we expect to be compensated for this by the
increase in burn-in services demanded for the new, faster microprocessor chips. The semiconductor
market in Thailand declined noticeably, and our operation in that region experienced a drop off in
sales by 17.8% to $353 in fiscal 2005 as compared to sales of $430 in fiscal 2004.
The gross margin in the Testing segment increased by 2.4% from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005. The
improvement in the Singapore Testing operation increased the overall margin for this segment. By
upgrading the existing facilities in that region, the operation avoided incurring additional rental
costs for the burn-in services for the new chips and saved in terms of minimal renovation costs
without incurring much depreciation. However, further renovation will incur more costs. With more
efficient manpower scheduling, labor costs as a percentage of sales dropped from 19.3% in fiscal
2004 to 17.6% in fiscal 2005, which also positively impacted the gross margin for this segment.
Distribution Segment
The revenue and gross margin for the Distribution segment for fiscal years 2005 and 2004 were as
follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2005 | 2004 | ||||||
Revenue |
$ | 3,073 | $ | 3,124 | ||||
Gross margin |
23.8 | % | 23.2 | % |
The Distribution segment experienced only insubstantial changes in net sales and gross margin.
However, the Distribution segment had a significant change in sales mix. Higher margin Test
Chambers, Vibration equipment and other products increased in sales by $717 in fiscal 2005 over
fiscal 2004, with a 68.8% increase in quantity sold and a 14.6% rise in average unit selling price.
This was mainly due to the semiconductor markets in Taiwan and China, which grew strongly over the
past year. The majority of our new customers had facilities set up in China and needed test
equipment for their quality control. Hence, there was a hike in demand for Vibration equipment and
Test Chambers from customers in Asia. In addition, a new Distribution operation was set up in
Singapore in fiscal 2005 to act as a distributor of electronic components for customers in the
region, which also positively impacted sales. Sales of lower-margin front-end products dipped by
$688 from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005, with a drop of 22.2% in quantity sold and a decline of 17.3%
in average unit selling price. The reason for this decrease was the decline in customer demand for
these products in the U.S. Thus, the sales team shifted focus from lower-margin front end
21
Table of Contents
products to marketing other, more profitable products. Sales of parts and services dropped $90
from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005 as the Company shifted its focus to training and testing on the
manufacturing of Wet Process Stations.
The 0.6% increase in gross margin for the Distribution segment was due to the substantial
percentage increase in quantity and average unit selling price for Test Chambers and Vibration
equipment. The increase in margin for Test Chambers and Vibration equipment was able to negate the
negative impact from decreased sales volume and selling price of lower-margin products and spare
parts.
Sales by geographical area
Geographically, net sales into and within the United States region decreased by slightly more than
half when compared to fiscal 2004. This was mainly attributable to the Manufacturing operation in
the U.S. In fiscal 2004, we relocated Universal Systems from the U.S. to Singapore due to high
manufacturing costs in the U.S. During the transition period, the engineers in Singapore were sent
for training. Hence, this Manufacturing operation was unable to contribute to sales to the extent
that it did in fiscal 2004 and resulted in the decline of 54.4% of the total decline in sales in
the U.S. Lastly, the slide in sales of lower-margin products in the Singapore Distribution
operation also contributed to the decline in sales into the U.S. The various Singapore operations,
along with the newly acquired Malaysia Testing operation, contributed to the increase in net sales
into and within Southeast Asia by 113.8% compared to fiscal 2004. Faster recovery in the consumer
and electronics market in the Asian region, as compared with those of the U.S., boosted sales for
the Testing and Distribution operations in this area. Net sales into and within Ireland and other
countries increased by 58.1% compared to fiscal 2004, due to higher equipment and peripherals sales
by Singapore Distribution operation to Japan, Taiwan and India.
Operating Expenses
The operating expenses for fiscal years 2005 and 2004 were as follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2005 | 2004 | ||||||
General and administrative |
$ | 4,695 | $ | 3,769 | ||||
Selling |
$ | 1,059 | $ | 875 | ||||
Research and development |
$ | 93 | $ | 117 | ||||
Impairment loss |
$ | 70 | $ | 4 | ||||
Loss (gain) on disposal of PP&E |
$ | 1 | $ | (101 | ) | |||
$ | 5,918 | $ | 4,664 | |||||
As a percentage of sales, operating expenses decreased by 1.4% from 24.4% in fiscal 2004 to 23.1%
in fiscal 2005. This slight drop was attributable to the decrease in general and administrative
expenses as a percentage of sales in the Manufacturing segment.
General and administrative expenses as a percentage of sales decreased by 1.4% from 19.7% in fiscal
2004 to 18.3% in fiscal 2005. This was primarily due to the sudden surge in sales of burn-in
boards and systems in the Manufacturing segment, while at the same time, keeping operating expenses
in this segment minimal. On the other hand, in terms of dollar value, general and administrative
expenses increased by $926 compared to fiscal 2004 due to a number of factors. Salaries in the
Southeast Asia region increased $314 to accommodate the new testing operation in Malaysia and the
higher headcount needed in the Singapore cost center to support operations in Southeast Asia.
Bonus provisions in the amount of $87 were incurred in 2005 due to better performance by the
Singapore Testing and Manufacturing operations personnel, whereas there was a reversal of bonuses
in the amount of $97 in 2004 due to unmet bonus criteria. Increased professional fees, such as an
ISO audit and outsourcing of accounting services, contributed to $72 of the increase in the
Singapore and Thailand operations. Depreciation costs from the Thailand and Malaysian operations
increased by $53 due to the add-on of a building extension and facility renovations needed to
accommodate new products. Furthermore, the Company accrued $51 in fiscal 2005 for an annual event,
which was cancelled in fiscal 2004. We incurred higher bank charges of $14 in the Singapore
operation for the renewal of a guarantee and an increase in insurance in the amount of $9 for a new
policy. We incurred $73 in the Malaysia operation due to higher operating expenses such as
printing and stationary, insurance, upkeep of office and non-capitalized assets, as well as a
higher provision for doubtful debts of $22, as the tenant in our Malaysia facility defaulted on
payment. In the same operation was an overprovision for the cost of moving equipment in fiscal
2004 after the operation was scaled down. We incurred an increase in amortization costs of $96 for
customer relation intangibles in the Malaysia operation, and an increase of $9 for legal matters
pertaining to this newly acquired facility. We also incurred fees of $10 for consulting work on SOX
404 requirements and legal fees of $17 for the newly acquired operation for SEC disclosure
purposes. Corporate officers traveled more in fiscal 2005, increasing travel and entertainment
costs by $19. Another $30 in board fees were incurred due to an adjustment in directors
compensation at the beginning of the fiscal year. Furthermore, there was a reversal of bonuses of
$41 in the U.S. operation in fiscal 2004 due to unmet bonus criteria, whereas no such reversal
occurred in 2005. In the Ireland operation, we reinstated managers salaries in an
22
Table of Contents
aggregate amount of $46 as said amount had been lowered in fiscal 2004 due to cost cutting
measures. Finally, there was an increase in bad debts expense of $11 in one of the U.S. operations
for irrecoverable debt and $9 in miscellaneous costs. However, all of these factors were somewhat
offset by certain factors, such a $57 savings from the Universal Systems operation after it was
relocated from San Jose to Singapore. For the same reason there were savings of $17 in equipment
rental, $73 in insurance and $20 in audit fees. Also, there was lower headcount in the accounting
department in the U.S., which lowered the salary expenditure by $43. Finally, there was $10 in
lowered audit fees, as the service for fiscal 2005 have not yet been performed.
As a percentage of sales, selling expenses decreased slightly from 4.6% in fiscal 2004 to 4.1% in
fiscal 2005 due primarily to the surge in Manufacturing sales which offset an increase in headcount
in Distribution and higher commission and advertisement costs in Singapore. However, in terms of
dollar value, selling expenses increased by $184 from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005 due to several
factors. Salaries increased by $87 due to increased headcount for the expansion of the
Distribution operation in Singapore. The provision of warranty increased by $8 and commissions
increased by $115 due to higher equipment sales in the Manufacturing and Distribution segments,
respectively. Additionally, there was commission income in the Distribution segment in the amount
of $52 in fiscal 2004 and none in fiscal 2005. Finally, $14 more in advertising costs were spent
in order to procure new customers in Singapore. All these factors were somewhat offset by savings
in salaries of sales personnel of $50, commission of $20 and rental and utilities of $33 as
compared to fiscal 2004 due to the relocation of the Manufacturing operation from San Jose to
Singapore. Additionally, some new customers of our Malaysia and Singapore operations were located
in those same areas, therefore cutting traveling expenses by $8.
Research and development expenses decreased $24 from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005 due to less
activity in the U.S. operation.
The Company had an impairment loss of $70 in fiscal 2005 consisting of machinery and equipment,
furniture and fixtures, and leasehold improvement pertaining to the Singapore Testing operation.
Due to the decrease in demand for the slower speed microprocessor chips, some of our existing
burn-in facilities assets became obsolete. In contrast to fiscal 2004, there was an impairment
loss in the amount of $4.
There was a gain on disposal of fixed assets of $101 in fiscal 2004, derived primarily from the
Ireland and Thailand operations, on sales of equipment and boards. There was a minimal loss in
fiscal 2005 on disposal of fixed assets.
Income (loss) from operations
The income (loss) from operations for fiscal years 2005 and 2004 were as follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2005 | 2004 | ||||||
Manufacturing Segment |
$ | (109 | ) | $ | (205 | ) | ||
Testing Segment |
$ | 470 | $ | 241 | ||||
Distribution Segment |
$ | (142 | ) | $ | (27 | ) | ||
Corporate |
$ | 27 | $ | 27 | ||||
$ | 246 | $ | 36 | |||||
The income from operations increased by $210 from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005, contributable to all
but the Distribution segment.
In the Manufacturing segment, loss from operations went down from $205 in fiscal 2004 to $109 in
fiscal 2005. The relocation of Universal Systems resulted in the reduction of certain fixed costs,
such as $107 in salaries, $123 in office and equipment rental, $123 in utilities and insurance
costs, $20 in commissions and another $20 in professional and audit fees. The transferred
operation is currently being operated by existing Singapore personnel. General and administrative
expenses in the Manufacturing segment as a percentage of sales by that segment dropped from 12.6%
in fiscal 2004 to 9.8% in fiscal 2005 while selling expenses as a percentage of sales dropped from
5.5% to 2.9%, mainly due to the 50.0% increase in sales in fiscal 2005 compared to fiscal 2004.
Furthermore, the Manufacturing operation in Singapore managed the sales increase with its existing
headcount while outsourcing some projects in order to maintain a lean workforce. With this
strategy, the operation was able to operate at lower overhead.
The Testing segment experienced a $229 increase in income from operations from fiscal 2004 to
fiscal 2005. Much of this improvement was due to higher gross profit. Some was the result of more
efficient scheduling of manpower and the upgrading of some of our existing facilities to cater to
the changing requirements of customers, which put us at a competitive edge and allowed us to
generate greater profits. Despite higher general and administrative expenses in this segment,
which increased from 20.9% in fiscal 2004 to 22.8% in fiscal 2005, the gross profit was more than
enough to offset the higher salaries, salary-related expenses and additional costs for setting up
the newly acquired burn-in facility in Malaysia. In addition, the Malaysia Testing
23
Table of Contents
operation synchronized its billing function with its customers in order to resolve some long
outstanding debts. As a result, no doubtful debts provision was required from this operation at
the end of fiscal 2005.
These improvements in the overall income from operations were offset by the decline in operating
income in the Distribution segment, which dropped by $115 from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005. This
decline was mainly due to lower sales and greater selling expenses incurred in the Singapore
Distribution operations. Additionally, we mobilized some of our engineers to undergo training on
the manufacturing of Wet Process Stations. This training and testing required a fair amount of
time and cost for these engineers, impacting the income from operation in this segment.
Additionally, selling expenses as a percentage of sales increased from 11.2% in fiscal 2004 to
19.5% in fiscal 2005 due to increased commissions of $96 in the Singapore Distribution operation as
a result of an increase in sales of commissionable equipment. This same operation had
commissionable income of $52 in fiscal 2004 but none in fiscal 2005. Salaries in this segment
increased by $100 due to the expansion of the Distribution operation in Singapore. However, at the
current level of sales as a distributor, the margin was not sufficient to cover the salary and
rental costs. We anticipate that the operation will continue to search for products with a higher
margin.
There was no major movement in the operating income for Corporate, which remained at $27 as
compared to fiscal 2004.
Interest Expense
The interest expenses for fiscal years 2005 and 2004 were as follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2005 | 2004 | ||||||
Interest expense |
$ | (176 | ) | $ | (120 | ) |
Interest expense increased by $56 from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005. This was due to higher usage of
credit by the Singapore operations for the expansion of its facilities, thereby incurring higher
interest expenses of $77. The higher expenses were offset by a decrease in the interest from
capital leases of $20 and a decrease in miscellaneous expenses of $1.
Other Income
Other income for fiscal years 2005 and 2004 were as follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2005 | 2004 | ||||||
Other income |
$ | 323 | $ | 372 |
Other income decreased by $49 from fiscal 2004 to fiscal 2005 due to several factors. There was a
gain on marketable securities of $115 after the Malaysia subsidiary disposed of all investments and
subsequently exited the market in fiscal 2004, whereas there was no such transaction in fiscal
2005. Furthermore, there was lower interest income of $20 and lower dividend income of $2 from the
Malaysia subsidiary. However, this was offset by the increase in rental income of $24 due to the
leasing out of the facilities in Ireland and Malaysia. There was an exchange gain of $22 in the
Singapore and Thailand operations. Finally, sundry income increased by $12.
Income Tax
The total income tax provision increased by $157, from $13 in fiscal 2004 to $170 in fiscal 2005.
Of the change of $157, there was an increase in the current portion of foreign income tax by $52,
from $77 in fiscal 2004 to $129 in fiscal 2005. This increase was attributed mainly to the higher
taxable income generated by our Singapore operation. The Singapore operation generated a profit of
$561 in fiscal 2005 and a loss of $61 in fiscal 2004. In addition, there was a tax provision of
$35 in the Thailand operation based on taxable income of $154 in fiscal 2005. This was lower
compared to the tax provision of $55 in fiscal 2004 based on taxable income of $231. Even though
the Malaysia and Ireland operations suffered losses in fiscal 2005, there were still certain
minimal tax provisions incurred.
The increase in deferred income tax provision of $38 which was incurred in fiscal 2005 was the
difference between deferred tax liability solely in Singapore of $682 as of June 30, 2005 and $644
as of June 30, 2004. Comparing the deferred income tax benefit of $67 for fiscal 2004, the
resulting change was $105, accounting for 67% of the total change of $157 aforementioned. The
increase in deferred tax liabilities was attributable mainly to the result of the timing
differences related to the recording of depreciation expenses for book and tax purposes and
estimated tax liability resulting from accumulated corporate expense allocated from the U.S. In
the meantime, the Company did not recognize any deferred income tax benefits related to the net
operating losses generated in the U.S. Management believes that it was more likely than not that
these future benefit from these timing differences would not be realized. Accordingly, the Company
provided a full valuation on the estimated deferred tax assets.
24
Table of Contents
The Companys effective income tax rate increased from 5% in fiscal 2004 to 43% in fiscal 2005.
The higher effective income tax rate in fiscal 2005 was due mainly to the decrease in foreign tax
rate reduction which was negative 9% for fiscal 2005 compared to negative 37% in fiscal 2004. The
decrease in foreign tax rate reduction was the result of an increase in income tax provision in our
subsidiaries outside the U.S. for fiscal 2005 compared to the income tax provision in these
subsidiaries for fiscal 2004. In addition, the change in valuation allowance to deferred tax
assets in fiscal 2005 contributed 9% compared to 2% in fiscal 2004. Finally, the other permanent
differences contributed 3% in fiscal 2005 whereas there were none in fiscal 2004.
The Company files income tax returns in the U.S., Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, and Ireland,
respectively. Income taxes are provided in those countries where taxable income is earned. Income
in one country is not offset by losses in another country. Accordingly, no benefit is provided for
losses in the countries except where the loss can be carried back against income recognized in
previous years. In essence, the effect of providing tax provision against taxable income and
providing no benefit for losses generated in the U.S. results in an effective tax rate that differs
from the federal statutory rate.
Net Income
As a result of all of the factors analyzed above, the net income for the fiscal year ended June 30,
2005 was approximately $221, which represented an increase of $1 from a net income of $220 for
fiscal 2004. Basic earnings per share for fiscal 2005 remained the same at $0.07 per share as in
fiscal 2004. Diluted earnings per share for fiscal 2005 remained at $0.07 per share as in fiscal
2004.
Year Ended June 30, 2004 (2004) Compared to Year Ended June 30, 2003 (2003)
The following table sets forth certain consolidated statements of income data as a percentage of
net sales for fiscal 2004 and 2003, respectively:
2004 | 2003 | |||||||
Net Sales |
100.0 | % | 100.0 | % | ||||
Cost of Sales |
75.5 | % | 76.5 | % | ||||
Gross Margin |
24.5 | % | 23.5 | % | ||||
Operating Expenses |
||||||||
General and administrative |
19.7 | % | 18.8 | % | ||||
Selling |
4.6 | % | 3.3 | % | ||||
Research and development |
0.6 | % | 0.6 | % | ||||
Impairment Loss |
0.0 | % | 1.7 | % | ||||
(Gain) Loss on disposal of PP&E |
-0.5 | % | 0.5 | % | ||||
Total Operating Expenses |
24.4 | % | 24.9 | % | ||||
Income from operations |
0.1 | % | -1.4 | % | ||||
Overall Net Sales and Gross Margin
Overall sales for fiscal 2004 were $19,154, down $2,092 from fiscal 2003 by a difference of 9.85%.
This decrease in sales was primarily due to the significant drop in sales in the Distribution
segment, as well as decreased activity in the Testing segment, both of which offset the surge in
sales in the Manufacturing segment, especially in the fourth quarter. Overall gross margin
increased marginally by less than 1% from 23.5% in fiscal 2003 to 24.5% in fiscal 2004, primarily
attributable to the Distribution segment even though sales in that segment decreased significantly.
Distribution Segment
The revenue and gross margin for the Distribution segment for fiscal years 2004 and 2003 were as
follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Revenue |
$ | 3,124 | $ | 7,067 | ||||
Gross margin |
13.5 | % | 5.3 | % |
Net sales in the Distribution segment decreased 55.8%, a decrease of $3,943 from $7,067 in fiscal
2003 to $3,124 in fiscal 2004. The bulk of the sales decline was attributable to the decrease in
unit volume of low-margin products, which experienced a
25
Table of Contents
reduction in sales revenue of $3,926 from fiscal 2003 to fiscal 2004, along with a 34.7% drop in
quantity sold and a 49.6% reduction in selling price. Sales of Vibration products and Reflow ovens
fell by $115, with a drop of 33.3% in quantity sold. The demand for Vibration products diminished
as this equipment had an average unit selling price greater than $100. Customers in the United
States remained conservative in making large investments, hence demand was low. Customers showed a
preference to purchase substitute equipment at an average selling price below $30. As for Reflow
ovens, customers developed more stringent requirements in technology, and our existing vendor was
unable to satisfy the change. We will continue to search for other vendors who can meet our
customers requirements. However, the unit selling price of Vibration products and Reflow ovens
increased by 30.5% over fiscal 2003 due to our ability to meet customers specialized demands,
hence their willingness to pay more for this benefit. Additionally, spare parts and services
increased sales by $117.
Despite the decline in sales in the Distribution segment overall, the margin showed an improvement
of 8.2%, from 5.3% in fiscal 2003 to 13.5% in fiscal 2004 due to the decreased sales of low-margin
products combined with the improvement in average unit selling price of Vibration products and
Reflow ovens. This contributed mainly to the slight improvement in the overall gross margin
compared to fiscal 2003.
Testing Segment
The revenue and gross margin for the Testing segment for fiscal years 2004 and 2003 were as follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Revenue |
$ | 8,908 | $ | 9,505 | ||||
Gross margin |
29.2 | % | 38.4 | % |
The Testing segment also experienced some deterioration in sales. Sales dropped by 6.3% from $9,505
in fiscal 2003 to $8,908 in fiscal 2004. Burn-in volume for this segment decreased due to a change
in customers burn-in requirements. We adjusted to meet these specifications, but still suffered a
lower margin of 9.2% from fiscal 2003 because of operating with fixed costs. Also contributing was
the fall in product life cycle for one particular type of burn-in, and one new type of burn-in had
yet to ramp up as expected. Additionally, we adopted a reduction in service fees of approximately
13.3% in an effort to maintain existing customers and attract new ones in an increasingly
competitive market.
Gross margin dropped by 9.3%, from 38.5% in fiscal 2003 to 29.2% in fiscal 2004 due to several
factors. First, the Company reduced service fees in an effort to retain existing customers and
capture new ones in an increasingly competitive market. Second, material costs, such as utilities,
increased due to higher usage of certain products and some new administrative charges from the
utilities vendor.
Although the Thailand operation saw boosted sales in fiscal 2004, it generated a lower margin due
to a change in product mix, as more services at a lower margin were provided to one particular
customer with whom Trio-Tech has a long standing relationship.
Manufacturing Segment
The revenue and gross margin for the Manufacturing segment for fiscal years 2004 and 2003 were as
follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Revenue |
$ | 7,122 | $ | 4,674 | ||||
Gross margin |
19.3 | % | 19.1 | % |
The setback in sales in the Testing and Distribution Segments were partially offset by an
improvement in sales in the Manufacturing segment, resulting in an overall increase in sales of
52.4% from $4,674 in fiscal 2003 to $7,122 in fiscal 2004. The market conditions for the
microelectronics market remained positive as indicated by the improved backlog, which increased
from $582 in fiscal 2003 to $3,440 in fiscal 2004. Sales of burn-in systems and burn-in boards
increased, as did sales derived from fabrication and upgrading customers equipment. The Singapore
Manufacturing operation was chosen by a customer to be its major supplier to build systems for the
testing of microprocessor chips. This same operation also procured the business of burn-in board
sales to its new customer.
Sales of burn-in boards were $851 in fiscal 2004, an increase in quantity sold of 175.6% with a
drop in unit selling price of 7.2%. Sales of burn-in systems were $1,758, a 585% increase in
quantity sold and a 44.1% decrease in unit selling price over fiscal 2003. Even though the average
unit selling price decreased for all these products, the dollar volume resulting from the
substantial increase in the quantity sold of burn-in boards and burn-in systems exceeded the dollar
volume resulting from the drop in selling price. The sales of Artic Temperature Controlled Chucks
contributed to the decrease of $160 due to the decline in both quantity sold and average unit
selling price.
26
Table of Contents
Gross margin as a percentage of sales remained relatively flat at 19%, but the dollar volume
increased by $475 from $892 in fiscal 2003 to $1,367 in fiscal 2004, which was consistent with the
increase in sales. Another factor which contributed to a flat margin was due to the sale of certain
inventories with provision generating zero or little margin.
Geographically, net sales into and within the United States region decreased by 47.9%, from $9,038
in fiscal 2003 to $4,706 in fiscal 2004. The drop in demand in the U.S. for front-end products
from the Singapore Distribution segment contributed to 90.4% of the decline. It was also due in
part to the decline in demand for Artic Temperature Controlled Chucks as semiconductor equipment
capital spending budgets in the U.S. appeared to have been reduced based on lower growth
expectations for the second half of 2004. In addition, the U.S. Manufacturing operation was moved
from San Jose, California to Singapore at the very end of the third quarter, hence there was a
temporary lack of bookings for Wet Process Stations while we prepared for the manufacturing process
and determined the needs of the customers in this new region. Net sales into and within Ireland
increased 33.1%, from $943 in fiscal 2003 from $1,255 in fiscal 2004. Responsible for the increase
was a boost in programming services in the Ireland operation. Net sales into and within the
Southeast Asia region increased by 18.0% from $11,306 in fiscal 2003 to $13,344 in fiscal 2004, as
there was higher demand for Burn-in Boards and Systems in Malaysia and Singapore.
Operating Expenses
The operating expenses for fiscal years 2004 and 2003 were as follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
General and administrative |
$ | 3,769 | $ | 3,992 | ||||
Selling |
$ | 875 | $ | 702 | ||||
Research and development |
$ | 117 | $ | 121 | ||||
Impairment loss |
$ | 4 | $ | 358 | ||||
(Gain) loss on disposal of PP&E |
$ | (101 | ) | $ | 115 | |||
$ | 4,664 | $ | 5,288 | |||||
As a percentage of sales, operating expenses dropped by 0.6% from 24.9% in fiscal 2003 to 24.4% in
fiscal 2004. This was a result of the slight movements in all the operating expense items as a
percentage of sales. As a percentage of sales, general and administrative expenses increased
slightly by 0.9% from 18.8% in fiscal 2003 to 19.7% in fiscal 2004.
General and administrative expenses decreased by $223 from fiscal 2003 to fiscal 2004. Several
factors contributed to this reduction, including diminished bonus provisions of $127 in the
Singapore operation due to unmet bonus payment criteria. Salaries were cut back by $117 in
Southeast Asia and $101 in the United States operation as part of cost cutting measures. Insurance
and rental diminished by $33 in Universal Systems after the operation along with its assets were
moved from San Jose, California to Singapore. In fiscal 2003, the Company granted certain stock
options which had an exercise price less than that of the fair market value resulting in a $14
compensation cost. In fiscal 2004, as all options were granted at fair market value, no similar
compensation costs were incurred. Finally, miscellaneous costs fell by $6. This was all offset by
higher depreciation of $25 due to renovations and additional purchases of equipment in Southeast
Asia, additional withholding tax of $10 from the Malaysia operation, additional provision for
doubtful debts of $9, and incremental telecommunication expenses of $9 due to overseas travel.
Additionally, a reversal in provision for contingent liabilities of $51 occurred in the third
quarter of fiscal 2003, as a court case was settled in favor of Trio-Tech and we were not liable
for the compensation. No such reversal of provision occurred in 2004. Likewise, in fiscal 2004
Corporate officers bonuses in the amount of $17 were paid, whereas in fiscal 2003 $54 in bonuses
were reversed as the group did not meet its bonus payment criteria.
As a percentage of sales, selling expenses increased marginally by 1.3%, from 3.3% in fiscal 2003
to 4.6% in 2004. Selling expenses as a whole increased by $173. One reason for this was an
increase in commissions of $43 in the U.S. operation due to a higher number of commissionable
sales, and a $60 increase in commissions in Singapore Manufacturing and Distribution for the same
reason. Another reason was the higher warranty cost of $165 due to more numerous equipment sales
for the Singapore Manufacturing and Distribution segments. Higher travel costs of $16 were
incurred in Singapore mainly for the purpose of transferring the manufacturing of Wet Process
Stations from San Jose to Singapore. Greater participation in semiconductor shows and conferences
resulted in higher trade show costs of $13 for fiscal 2004. Finally, there was an increase in
miscellaneous costs of $2. This was offset with a reduction in salaries of $50 in the Southeast
Asia operation through a reduction in headcount. Also, there was a savings of $49 in salaries in
the U.S. as the sales staff at Universal Systems was laid off in the third quarter of 2004, and a
savings in rent and utilities of $27 as this same facility was closed down.
Research and development remained relatively flat from fiscal 2003 to fiscal 2004.
27
Table of Contents
The loss on disposal of fixed assets of $115 in fiscal 2003 was related to the write off of
obsolete burn-in facilities in Southeast Asia in fiscal 2003. On the other hand, the gain on
disposal of $101 in fiscal 2004 was derived from the Ireland and Thailand operations. The Ireland
operation sold equipment which had been written off several years ago, hence enabling us to
recognize $62 of the sales proceeds as a total gain for the operation. Also, the Thailand
operation made a substantial sale of boards to one of its customers, realizing a gain of $39.
Income (loss) from operations
The income (loss) from operations for fiscal years 2004 and 2003 were as follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Manufacturing Segment |
$ | (205 | ) | $ | (802 | ) | ||
Testing Segment |
$ | 241 | $ | 803 | ||||
Distribution Segment |
$ | (27 | ) | $ | (212 | ) | ||
Corporate |
$ | 27 | $ | (76 | ) | |||
$ | 36 | $ | (287 | ) | ||||
The Company turned the operating loss of $287 in fiscal 2003 to an operating income of $36 in
fiscal 2004. The improvement was mainly attributable to the Manufacturing and Distribution
Segments, which more than offset the decline in operating income for the Testing Segment.
The operating loss in the Manufacturing Segment declined by $597, from $802 in fiscal 2003 to $205
in fiscal 2004. The reduction in operating loss resulted in part from the transfer of the Universal
Systems manufacturing operation from San Jose to Singapore in the third quarter of 2004. Hence,
certain fixed costs which were incurred in fiscal 2003 were not repeated in fiscal 2004. General &
administrative costs as a percentage of sales decreased from 21.8% in fiscal 2003 to 12.4% in
fiscal 2004, while selling expenses as a percentage of sales dropped from 8% to 5.4%, mainly due to
the significant rise in sales of 52.4%. The decline in general & administrative costs of 9.4% and
selling expenses of 2.6% as a percentage of sales was mainly attributable to Universal Systems.
After Universal Systems moved its manufacturing operation, along with all its equipment, to
Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. in Singapore, this resulted in a savings in high fixed costs,
such as salaries of $148, rental of $60, commissions of $15, and research and development costs of
$12 when compared to fiscal 2003.
The Distribution Segment also contributed to the improvement in operating income. Its operating
loss decreased by $185 from $212 in fiscal 2003 to $27 in fiscal 2004. This improvement was mainly
due to the change in product mix, which improved gross margin as mentioned earlier. Operating
expenses for Vibration products and Reflow Ovens remained similar to those in fiscal 2003 which,
along with the increase in price, contributed to the decrease in operating loss in the Distribution
Segment.
Corporate also contributed to the improvement in the overall operating income. The Corporate office
attempts to reimburse its operating expenses by imposing a fee to all subsidiaries on a fixed
percentage of total revenue. Due to the increase in Singapore Manufacturing sales in the fourth
quarter, while the rate remained unchanged, the fees collected in fiscal 2004 were more than
Corporate operating expenses. Hence, Corporate went from an operating loss of $76 in fiscal 2003
to an operating income of $27 in fiscal 2004, an increase of $103.
The above were more than enough to offset the decrease in operating income for the Testing Segment,
which declined from $803 in fiscal 2003 to $241 in fiscal 2004. The cost of goods sold and
operating expenses in the Testing segment, comprised of fixed and semi-fixed costs such as rental,
depreciation, and administrative salaries, remained fixed despite the overall decrease in sales.
With the increase in cost of goods sold as mentioned earlier due to higher utilities costs, the
operating income declined by $562.
Interest Expense
The interest expenses for fiscal years 2004 and 2003 were as follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Interest expense |
$ | (120 | ) | $ | (185 | ) |
Interest expense decreased by $65 in fiscal 2004 as compared to fiscal 2003. One reason for this
was the lower interest incurred on lines of credit as the Singapore and U.S. operations repaid
their lines of credit during the end of 2003 and the beginning of 2004. Also, lower interest was
incurred on a term loan in the Singapore operation as most of its loan was repaid. Offsetting this
was the interest from additional borrowings obtained for the building of extensions, burn-in
systems and other equipment during the year by the Singapore operation.
28
Table of Contents
Other Income
Other income for fiscal years 2004 and 2003 were as follow:
(In Thousands, unaudited) | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||
Other income |
$ | 372 | $ | 347 |
Other income increased $25 from fiscal 2003 to fiscal 2004. One contributing factor to this was
increased rental income due to the leasing out of factories in Ireland and Malaysia, which
contributed $80. Another cause was increased net gain on disposal of marketable securities of $66.
Offsetting these increases was a loss on currency exchange of $12 in 2004 versus an exchange gain
of $9 in 2003 for a total difference of $21. Also, we experienced a decrease of $19 in dividends
and interest income, a decline in royalty income of $20, a drop of $52 in sundry income, and a
decrease of $9 in miscellaneous income.
Income Tax
The total income tax provision decreased by $81 or 74.5%, from $94 in fiscal 2003 to $13 in fiscal
2004. Of the change of $81, there was an increase of $28 related to the current portion of income
tax due to the increase of $29 in foreign income tax provision and a decrease of $1 in state income
tax provision compared to those in fiscal 2003. The rest was related to the deferred portion of
income tax benefits. An increase of $29 in current portion of foreign income tax expense was a
result of a tax provision of approximately $19 incurred in the Ireland operation due to the gain of
$62 on disposal of equipment. The remaining $10 of the current portion of income tax provision was
incurred in the Malaysia operation due to the increase in its operating income.
The deferred income tax portion was changed from a provision of $42 in fiscal 2003 to a benefit of
$67 in fiscal 2004. The difference was approximately $109, which was attributable to a decrease of
deferred tax liability incurred mainly in Singapore. The decrease in deferred income tax expense
was the result of the timing differences related to the recording of depreciation expenses for book
and tax purposes and net operating loss carried forward in Singapore and Malaysia. The Company did
not recognize any income tax benefits related to the net operating losses generated in the U.S.
Management believes that when the future taxable income exceeds the cumulative losses, it is likely
that such benefits will be realized.
The Companys effective income tax rate decreased from 75% in fiscal 2003 to 5% in fiscal 2004.
The decrease in the effective income tax rate in fiscal 2004 was due to a change from net loss of
$125 before income tax to a net income of $288 before income tax, and due to a change in the income
tax provision of $94 in fiscal 2003 to income tax provision of $13 in fiscal 2004. As discussed
above, the decrease of deferred tax liability in Singapore contributed to the decrease of total
income tax provisions, which in turn contributed to the decrease of effective income tax rate. In
addition, the net loss in the U.S. decreased from $231 in fiscal 2003 to $87 in fiscal 2004 and net
income in foreign countries increased from $106 in fiscal 2003 to $375 in fiscal 2004, both of
which contributed to the decrease of effective income tax rate.
The Company files income tax returns in the U.S., Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, and Ireland,
respectively. Income taxes are provided in those countries where taxable income is earned. Income
in one country is not offset by losses in another country. Accordingly, no benefit is provided for
losses in the countries except where the loss can be carried back against income recognized in
previous years. In essence, the effect of providing tax against taxable income while providing no
benefit for losses generated in the U.S. results in an effective tax rate that differs from the
federal statutory rate.
Net (Loss) Income
As a result of all of the factors analyzed above, the net income for the fiscal year ended June 30,
2004 was approximately $220, which represented an increase of $301 from a net loss of $81 for
fiscal 2003, or a 371.6% change. Basic earnings per share for fiscal 2004 increased to $0.07 per
share from a basic loss per share of $0.03 in fiscal 2003, which represented an increase of $0.10,
a 333.3% change. Diluted earnings per share for fiscal 2004 were $0.07 per share, an increase of
$0.10 per share from a diluted loss per share of $0.03 for fiscal 2003.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Though the working capital (defined as current assets minus current liabilities) of $4,809 as
of June 30, 2005 represented a decrease of $1,880, or 28.1%, compared to working capital of $6,689
as of June 30, 2004 mainly due to a drop in short term deposits during fiscal 2005, the bulk of it
was used for long-term investment purposes. The Company acquired fixed assets of $736 located in
the new burn-in operation in Malaysia and $1,057 for the purchases of a new plant and machinery and
renovation in Malaysia and Singapore to meet the new customers requirements.
29
Table of Contents
The current ratio (defined as current assets divided by current liabilities) was 1.82 times as of
June 30, 2005 compared to 2.19 as of June 30, 2004. The decrease in current ratio was due mainly
to the decrease in short-term deposits of which the most proceeds were used for the investments in
the Malaysia operation. We believe that with many years of good cashflow records, the Company
still has the ability to maintain positive working capital and strong liquidity in the near future.
Management believes the Company has the economic wherewithal to satisfy any short-term funding for
several reasons. Our current ratio remained positive at 1.82 as of June 30, 2005. Currently, the
Singapore operations are financed using short-term loans and lines of credit, which are sufficient
to meet their needs. Furthermore, the Manufacturing operation in San Jose, California was moved to
Singapore and is being operated by the existing Singapore personnel. The relocation eased the need
for working capital used to finance that operation. In addition, we decided to close our testing
facility in Dublin, Ireland subsequent to the 2005 fiscal year end, as the operation generated cash
only from renting out the property and had not generated net cash from testing services, for the
past three years.
We anticipate that the short-term funding required in the near future will be for the purchase of
equipment as requested by our customers (in the amount of approximately $295) and the upgrading of
the existing computer system in preparation for the SOX404 audit (in the amount of approximately
$320). In addition, our working capital was tied up due to credit terms extended to a new customer
which were longer than the credit terms extended to us from our supplier. Other requirements will
be for the new Distribution operation in Singapore, where we anticipate purchasing greater amounts
of raw materials for Wet Process Stations and for new products based on the increased backlog as of
June 30, 2005.
The Companys credit rating provides ready and ample access to funds in global capital markets. At
June 30, 2005, the Company had available short-term lines of credit totaling $9,802, of which
$9,435 was unused.
Entity with Facility | Type of | Interest | Expiry dates | Credit | Unused | |||||||||
Banks prime rate | ||||||||||||||
(6% as at June 30, | ||||||||||||||
2005) plus 1% per | ||||||||||||||
Trio-Tech Malaysia |
Line of Credit | annum | January 2006 | $ | 106 | $ | 75 | |||||||
Banks prime rate | ||||||||||||||
(6% as at June 30, | ||||||||||||||
2005) plus 1% per | ||||||||||||||
Trio-Tech Bangkok |
Line of Credit | annum | October 2005 | 97 | 97 | |||||||||
(See Note 5 of the | (See Note 5 of the | |||||||||||||
financial | financial | |||||||||||||
Trio-Tech Singapore |
Line of Credit | statements) | statements) | 9,599 | 9,263 | |||||||||
$ | 9,802 | $ | 9,435 | |||||||||||
The Company procured long-term loans of $863 during fiscal 2005 to convert three of the
existing facilities in the Singapore Testing operation for handling the burn-in process of the new
type of microprocessor chips to improve cost effectiveness. The Singapore Testing operation
required approximately $601 to set up additional facilities for the burn-in services of a faster
speed microprocessor chip. We were able to finance this capital expenditure with our existing term
loan. The Malaysia Testing operation is in the process of negotiating with the banker for a term
loan to finance equipment and upgrade facilities with air-conditioning, per customers request.
There were no other capital commitments except those that were disclosed as of June 30, 2005.
The following contractual obligations servicing table describes our overall future cash obligations
based on various current contracts in the next three years:
Payments Due by Period (at June 30, 2005) | ||||||||||||||||
Less than | 2 - 3 | After | ||||||||||||||
Total | 1 Year | Years | 3 Years | |||||||||||||
Lines of Credit |
$ | 336 | $ | 336 | $ | | $ | | ||||||||
Notes Payable |
1,407 | 703 | 704 | | ||||||||||||
Capital Leases |
255 | 134 | 113 | 8 | ||||||||||||
Operating Leases |
1,265 | 698 | 567 | | ||||||||||||
$ | 3,263 | $ | 1,871 | $ | 1,384 | $ | 8 | |||||||||
30
Table of Contents
Fiscal 2005
Net cash provided by operating activities during fiscal 2005 was $924, decreasing by $879 from net
cash of $1,803 provided by operating activities during fiscal 2004. The decrease was primarily due
to the following reasons: the net impact of adjusting non-cash items for fiscal 2005 was $1,607
compared to $872 for fiscal 2004, whereas the total changes in operating assets and liabilities for
fiscal 2005 were a negative $904 compared to a positive $711 for fiscal 2004. Among the non-cash
items, depreciation and amortization expenses for fiscal 2005 made a significant impact of $1,521
(positive cash flow) whereas the accounts receivable, other assets, inventories and account payable
and accrued liabilities for fiscal 2005 made a significant impact of $993 (negative cash flow).
Management believed that the decrease in net cash provided by operating activities was consistent
with the decrease in working capital.
Net cash used in investing activities during fiscal 2005 was $941, reflecting a decrease of $587
compared to the net cash of $1,528 during fiscal 2004. The decrease in net cash used in investing
activities was attributed mainly to the decrease in purchasing short-term deposits in fiscal 2005,
as the proceeds from maturing short-term deposits were used for capital expenditures and the
acquisition of the business in Malaysia, which activity did not take place in fiscal 2004. In
fiscal 2004, the proceeds from maturing short-term deposits were less than the cash outflow to
invest in short-term deposits. In contrast, the proceeds from maturing short-term deposits in
fiscal 2005 were much more than the proceeds in fiscal 2004, though still not adequate to cover the
investment in capital expenditures, short-term deposits and acquisition of the business in
Malaysia. As all investments in marketable securities had been disposed during fiscal 2004, there
were no such proceeds from selling investments in marketable securities during fiscal 2005.
Net cash provided by financing activities during fiscal 2005 was $117, reflecting an increase of
$581 compared to the net cash used of $464 during fiscal 2004. The increase was due mainly to the
increase in borrowings on lines of credit of $190 and lower payments for debts and capital leases
of $909 during fiscal 2005 compared to net repayments of $1,359 for the year ended June 30, 2004.
Payments were higher in fiscal 2004 due to early repayment on a loan in Singapore. The increase in
borrowing on lines of credit resulted in fewer proceeds from borrowing through long-term debts,
noting proceeds from long-term debts of $862 in fiscal 2005 compare to $999 in fiscal 2004.
Furthermore, the increase in cash provided by financing activities was due to the repayment of $155
on the outstanding line of credit in fiscal 2004 whereas there was no such cash outflow in fiscal
2005.
Approximately $670 of short-term deposits as of June 30, 2005 were held in the Companys 55% owned
Malaysian subsidiary. Of such amount, $510 was denominated in the currency of Malaysia, of which
$139 is currently available for movement overseas as authorized by the Central Bank of Malaysia.
There were additional amounts available as dividends (after making deductions for income tax)
pursuant to Malaysian regulations.
Fiscal 2004
Net cash provided by operating activities during fiscal 2004 was $1,803, increasing by $424 from
net cash of $1,379 provided by operating activities during fiscal 2003. The increase was primarily
due to the following reasons: the net impact of adjusting non-cash items for fiscal 2004 was $872
compared to $1,577 for fiscal 2003, whereas the total changes in operating assets and liabilities
for fiscal 2004 were a positive $711 compared to a negative $117 for fiscal 2003. Among the
non-cash items, depreciation and amortization expenses for fiscal 2004 made a significant impact of
$1,145 (positive cash flow) whereas the gain on sales of equipment and marketable securities made a
negative impact of $216 on the cash flow. Simultaneously, the accounts payable and accrued
liabilities for fiscal 2004 made a positive impact of $1,305 on the cash flow, which was reduced by
other receivables, accounts receivables and inventories of $626 (negative cash flow). Management
believed that the increase in net cash provided by operating activities was consistent with the
increase in working capital.
Net cash used in investing activities during fiscal 2004 was $1,528, reflecting a decrease of
$2,422 compared to the net cash provided by investing activities of $894 during fiscal 2003. The
increase in net cash used in investing activities was attributable mainly to the lower proceeds
from maturing short-term deposits and disposal of marketable securities in fiscal 2004. As a
result, there were fewer investments in short-term deposits and marketable securities in fiscal
2004 than in fiscal 2003. The proceeds from sales of equipment in fiscal 2004 did not help
significantly in reducing the impact on cash used in investing activities, and there were no such
proceeds in fiscal 2003.
Net cash used in financing activities during fiscal 2004 was $464, reflecting a decrease of $1,287
compared to $1,751 during fiscal 2003. The drop was due mainly to the increase in borrowings on
long-term debts of $999 and lower payments for lines of credit of $155 during fiscal 2004 compared
to net repayments of $932 for the year ended June 30, 2003. Furthermore, the decrease in cash used
in financing activities was due also to the cash received from stock options exercised of $104 in
fiscal 2004, whereas there was no such cash received in fiscal 2003. In contrast, there were
higher payments for debts and capital leases of $1,359 during fiscal 2004 compared to net
repayments of $1,284 for the year ended June 30, 2003.
31
Table of Contents
Approximately $2,011 of short-term deposits as of June 30, 2004 were held in the Companys 55%
owned Malaysian subsidiary. Of such amount, $1,742 were denominated in the currency of Malaysia,
of which $147 were available for movement overseas, as authorized by the Central Bank of Malaysia.
There were additional amounts available as dividends (after making deductions for income tax)
pursuant to Malaysian regulation.
Corporate Guarantee Arrangement
The Company provides a corporate guarantee to one of its subsidiaries in Southeast Asia of
approximately $1,484 to secure line-of-credit and term loans from a bank to finance the operations
of such subsidiary. With the strong financial position of the subsidiary company, the Company
believes this corporate guarantee arrangement will have no material impact on its liquidity or
capital resources.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2004, the FASB announced that SFAS No. 123R (revised December 2004), Share-Based
Payment, sets accounting requirements for share-based compensation to employees, including
employee-stock-purchase-plans (ESPPs), and provides guidance on accounting for awards to
non-employees. This Statement will require the Company to recognize in the income statement the
grant-date fair value of stock options and other equity-based compensation issued to employees, but
expresses no preference for a type of valuation model. For public entities, this Statement is
effective for the first fiscal year beginning after June 15, 2005. The impact of adoption of SFAS
No. 123(R) will depend on levels of share-based payments granted in the future. The Company
adopted this Statement beginning July 1, 2005.
In November 2004, the FASB issued Statement of Accounting Standards No. 151, Inventory Costs, An
Amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4 (SFAS No. 151). SFAS No. 151 eliminates the so abnormal
criterion in ARB No. 43 Inventory Pricing. SFAS No. 151 no longer permits a company to
capitalize inventory costs on their balance sheets when the production defect rate varies
significantly from the expected rate. SFAS No. 151 reduces the differences between U.S. and
international accounting standards. SFAS No. 151 is effective for inventory costs incurred during
annual periods beginning after June 15, 2005. The Company does not believe that this pronouncement
will have a material effect on the Companys financial position and net income.
In December 2004, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS109-1 (FSP FAS 109-1), Application of
FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes, for the Tax Deduction on Qualified Production
Activities Provided by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. The Jobs Creation Act provides a
deduction for income from qualified domestic production activities, to be phased in from 2005
through 2010, which is intended to replace the existing extra-territorial income exclusion for
foreign sales. In FSP 109-1, the FASB decided the deduction for qualified domestic production
activities should be accounted for as a special deduction under SFAS No. 109 rather than as a rate
reduction. Accordingly, any benefit from the deduction will be reported in the period in which the
deduction is claimed on the tax return, and no adjustment to deferred taxes at June 30, 2005 is
required.
The Jobs Creation Act also creates a temporary incentive for U.S. corporations to repatriate
accumulated income earned abroad by providing an 85 percent dividends received deduction for
certain dividends from controlled foreign corporations. The deduction is subject to a number of
limitations and uncertainty remains as to how to interpret numerous provisions in the Act. FSP
109-2 addresses when to reflect in the financial statements the effects of the one-time tax benefit
on the repatriation of foreign earnings. Under SFAS No. 109, companies are normally required to
reflect the effect of new tax law changes in the period of enactment. FSP 109-2 provides companies
additional time to determine the amount of earnings, if any, that they intend to repatriate under
the Jobs Creation Acts provisions. The Company is currently assessing the financial impact of
implementing FSP FAS 109-1 on the consolidated financial statements.
In December 2004, the FASB issued the Statement of Financial Account Standards No. 153, Exchange
of Nonmonetary Assets, An Amendment of APB Opinion No. 29 (SFAS No. 153). SFAS No 153 addresses
the measurement of exchanges of nonmonetary assets. SFAS No. 153 eliminates the exception from
fair value measurement for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive assets in paragraph 21(b) of
APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions, and replaces it with an exception for
exchanges that do not have commercial substance. SFAS No. 153 specifies that a nonmonetary exchange
has commercial substance if the future cash flows of the entity are expected to change
significantly as a result of the exchange. The provisions of SFAS No. 153 became effective for
nonmonetary asset exchanges occurring in fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2005. Earlier
application is permitted for nonmonetary asset exchanges occurring in fiscal periods beginning
after the date this Statement was issued. The provisions of this Statement shall be applied
prospectively. The Company does not believe that this pronouncement will have a material effect on
the Companys financial position and net income.
In May 2005, the FASB issued Statement No. 154, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, a
replacement of APB Opinion No. 20, Accounting Changes, and Statement No. 3, Reporting Accounting
Changes in Interim Financial Statements. (SFAS No.
32
Table of Contents
154). SFAS No. 154 changes the requirements for the accounting for, and reporting of, a change in
accounting principle. Previously, most voluntary changes in accounting principles were required to
be recognized by way of a cumulative effect adjustment within net income during the period of the
change. SFAS No. 154 generally requires retrospective application to the prior period financial
statements of voluntary changes in accounting principles. SFAS No. 154 is effective for accounting
changes made in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. However, SFAS No. 154 does not
change the transition provisions of any existing accounting pronouncements. The Company does not
believe the adoption of SFAS No. 154 will have a material effect on its results of operations or
financial condition.
CERTAIN RISKS THAT MAY AFFECT OUR FUTURE RESULTS
We hereby caution stockholders, prospective investors in Trio-Tech International and other readers
that the following important factors, among others, in some cases have affected, and in the future
could affect, our stock price or cause our actual results for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2005
and future fiscal years and quarters to differ materially from those expressed in any
forward-looking statements, oral or written, made by or on behalf of us.
Our operating results are affected by a variety of factors
Our operating results are affected by a wide variety of factors that could materially affect
revenues and profitability or lead to significant variability of quarterly or annual operating
results. These factors include, among others, components relating to:
| economic and market conditions in the semiconductor industry; |
| market acceptance of our products and services; |
| changes in technology in the semiconductor industry, which could affect demand for our products and services; |
| changes in testing processes; |
| the impact of competition; |
| the lack of long-term purchase or supply agreements with customers and vendors; |
| changes in military or commercial testing specifications, which could affect the market for our products and services; |
| difficulties in profitably integrating acquired businesses, if any, into the Company; |
| the loss of key personnel or the shortage of available skilled employees; |
| international political or economic events; |
| currency fluctuations; and |
| other technological, economic, financial and regulatory factors beyond our control. |
Unfavorable changes in these or other factors could materially and adversely affect our financial
condition or results of operations. We may not be able to generate revenue growth and any revenue
growth that is achieved may not be sustained. Our business, results of operations and financial
condition would be materially adversely affected if operating expenses increase and are not
subsequently followed by increased revenues.
Semiconductor industry cycles affect our business
Our business depends primarily upon the capital expenditures of semiconductor manufacturers,
assemblers and other testing companies worldwide. These industries in turn depend on the current
and anticipated market demand for integrated circuits and products utilizing semiconductor devices.
The global semiconductor industry generally, and the semiconductor testing equipment industry in
particular, are volatile and cyclical, with periodic capacity shortages and excess capacity. In
periods of excess capacity, the industry sharply cuts its purchases of capital equipment, including
our distributed products, and reduces testing volumes, including our testing services. Excess
capacity also causes downward pressure on the selling prices of our products and services.
Our operating results have been adversely affected by past downturns and slowdowns. There is no
assurance that there will not be downturns or slowdowns in the future that may adversely affect our
financial condition or operating results. In addition, if one or more of our primary customers
reduces its or their purchases or use of our products or testing services, our financial results
could be materially and adversely affected. We anticipate that we will continue to be primarily
dependent on the semiconductor industry for the foreseeable future.
Rapid technological changes may make our products obsolete or result in decreased prices or
increased expenses
Technology changes rapidly in the semiconductor industry and may make our services or products
obsolete. Advances in technology may lead to significant price erosion for products which we test
with our older testing technologies. Our success will depend in part on our ability to develop and
offer more advanced testing technologies and processes in the future, to anticipate both future
demand and the technology to supply that demand, to enhance our current products and services, to
provide those products and services at competitive prices on a timely and cost-effective basis and
to achieve market acceptance of those
33
Table of Contents
products and services. To accomplish these goals, we may be required to incur significant
engineering expenses. As new products or services are introduced, we may experience warranty
claims or product returns. We may not be able to accomplish these goals correctly or timely
enough. If we fail in our efforts, our products and services may become less competitive or
obsolete.
Our dependence on international sales involves significant risk
Sales and services to customers outside the United States accounted for approximately 92%, 70% and
58% of our net revenues for fiscal 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. Approximately 82%, 69% and
53% of our net revenues in fiscal 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively, were generated from business
in Southeast Asia. We expect that our non-U.S. sales and services will continue to generate the
major part of our future revenues. Testing services in Southeast Asia were performed primarily for
American companies, and to a lesser extent German companies, selling products and doing business in
those regions. International business operations may be adversely affected by many factors,
including fluctuations in exchange rates, imposition of government controls, trade restrictions,
political, economic and business events and social and cultural differences.
We may incur losses due to foreign currency fluctuations
Significant portions of our revenues are denominated in Singapore and Euro dollars, Malaysian
Ringgit, Thai baht and other currencies. Consequently, a portion of our costs, revenues and
operating margins may be affected by fluctuations in exchange rates, primarily between the U.S.
dollar and such foreign currencies. We are also affected by fluctuations in exchange rates if
there is a mismatch between our foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities. Foreign
currency translation adjustments resulted in an increase of $25 to shareholders equity for fiscal
2005, an increase of $155 to shareholders equity for fiscal 2004 and an increase of $18 to
shareholders equity for fiscal 2003.
We try to reduce our risk of foreign currency fluctuations by purchasing certain equipment and
supplies in U.S. dollars and seeking payment, when possible, in U.S. dollars. However, we may not
be successful in our attempts to mitigate our exposure to exchange rate fluctuations. Those
fluctuations could have a material adverse effect on the Companys financial results.
We do not rely on patents to protect our products or technology
We hold U.S. patents relating to our pressurization humidity testing equipment and certain aspects
of our Artic temperature test systems. Additionally, in fiscal 2001, we were granted patents for
certain aspects of our new ranges of Artic temperature controlled chucks. However, although we
believe our patents are integral to our business, generally we do not rely on patent or trade
secret protection for our products or technology. Competitors may develop technologies similar to
or more advanced than ours. We cannot assure that our current or future products will not be
copied or will not infringe on the patents of others. Moreover, the cost of litigation of any claim
or damages resulting from infringement of patents or other intellectual property could adversely
affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Intense competition can adversely affect our operating results
The semiconductor equipment and testing industries are intensely competitive. Significant
competitive factors include price, technical capabilities, quality, automation, reliability,
product availability and customer service. We face competition from established and potential new
competitors, many of whom have greater financial, engineering, manufacturing and marketing
resources than our resources. New products or testing facilities offered by our competitors could
cause a decline in our revenues or a loss of market acceptance of our existing products and
services. Increased competitive pressure could also lead to intensified price-based competition.
Price-based competition may result in lower prices, adversely affecting our operating results.
Loss, reduction or delay of orders from significant customers could adversely affect our financial
condition
The semiconductor manufacturing industry is highly concentrated, with a relatively small number of
large manufacturers and assemblers accounting for a substantial portion of our revenues from
product sales and testing revenues. Our experience has been that sales to particular customers may
fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year. In fiscal 2005, 2004, and 2003,
sales of equipment and services to our three largest customers accounted for approximately 72%,
52%, and 49%, respectively, of our net revenues. This applies in particular to our new testing
operation in Malaysia, which currently has only one major customer. In the event that the Company
loses this customer, all the capital purchases to meet this customers requirement will be
converted to support other products. Our ability to maintain close, satisfactory relationships
with our customers is essential to our stability and growth. The loss of or reduction or delay in
orders from our significant customers, or delays in collecting accounts receivable from our
significant customers, could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
34
Table of Contents
There is a limited market for our testing products and services
If testing equipment is purchased by semiconductor manufacturers and assemblers, it may reduce the
likelihood that they will make further purchases of such equipment or use our laboratories for
testing services. Although military or other specifications require certain testing to be done by
independent laboratories, over time other current customers may have less need for our testing
services. We believe that there is a growing trend toward outsourcing of the integrated circuit
test process. As a result, we anticipate continued growth in the test laboratory business.
However, there is no assurance that this trend will continue. In an attempt to diversify our sales
mix, we may seek to develop and introduce new or advanced products, and to acquire other companies
in the semiconductor equipment manufacturing business.
Acquisition and integration of new businesses could disrupt our ongoing business, distract
management and employees, increase our expenses and adversely affect our business
A portion of any future growth may be accomplished through the acquisition of other entities. The
success of those acquisitions will depend, in part, on our ability to integrate the acquired
personnel, operations, products, services and technologies into our organization, to retain and
motivate key personnel of the acquired entities and to retain the customers of those entities. We
may not be able to identify suitable acquisition opportunities, obtain financing on acceptable
terms to bring the acquisition to fruition or to integrate such personnel, operations, products or
services. The process of identifying and closing acquisition opportunities and integrating
acquisitions into our operations may distract our management and employees, disrupt our ongoing
business, increase our expenses and materially and adversely affect our operations. We may also be
subject to certain other risks if we acquire other entities, such as the assumption of additional
liabilities. We may issue additional equity securities or incur debt to pay for future
acquisitions.
We do not have contracts with key suppliers
We have no written contracts with any of our suppliers. Our suppliers may terminate their
relationship with us at any time without notice. There can be no assurance that we will be able to
find satisfactory replacement suppliers or that new suppliers would not be more expensive than the
current suppliers if any of our suppliers were to terminate their relationship with us.
We are highly dependent on key personnel
Our success has depended, and, to a large extent will depend, on the continued services of S.W.
Yong, our Chief Executive Officer and President, Victor H. M. Ting, our Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer, our other key senior executives, and engineering, marketing, sales, production
and other personnel. We do not have an employment agreement with Mr. Yong or Mr. Ting, but we are
the beneficiary of key man life insurance in the amount of $6 million on Mr. Yong and $2 million
on Mr. Ting. The loss of these key personnel, who would be difficult to replace, could harm our
business and operating results. Competition for management in our industry is intense and we may
be unsuccessful in attracting and retaining the executive management and other key personnel that
we require.
Our management has significant influence over corporate decisions
Currently our officers and directors and their affiliates beneficially own approximately 33.1% of
the outstanding shares of common stock, including options held by them that are exercisable within
60 days of the date of filing of this 10-K. As a result, they may be able to significantly
influence matters requiring approval of the shareholders, including the election of directors, and
may be able to delay or prevent a change in control of the Company.
We have not paid cash dividends
We have never paid any cash dividends on our common stock. We anticipate that the future earnings,
if any, will be retained for use in the business or for other corporate purposes. Additionally,
California law prohibits the payment of dividends if the Company does not have sufficient retained
earnings or cannot meet certain asset to liability ratios. The Company presently intends to sell
the real property it owns in Ireland. However, as of the date of filing of this Annual Report, the
Company has not entered into any agreement or letter of intent with respect thereto and thus does
not know whether the property will be sold or, if so, the purchase price therefor or the net
proceeds that may derive therefrom. Assuming that the Company sells the real property and that
there are net proceeds therefrom, we may consider using the net proceeds therefrom for a variety of
purposes, which may (but need not) include payment of a cash dividend. Due to the restrictions on
the payment of dividends under California law, and based on the fact that the Company has no
agreement to sell the property and thus cannot at this time analyze whether or not a dividend would
be advisable or permitted under law, the Company is not able at this time to advise whether or not
a cash dividend may be declared in the foreseeable future and there is no assurance that any
dividend will be declared or paid or, if declared, the amount thereof. Aside from the possibility
of the declaration of a dividend following sale of the Ireland property as described in this
paragraph, it is anticipated that no dividends will be paid to holders of common stock in the
foreseeable future.
35
Table of Contents
Possible dilutive effect of outstanding options
As of June 30, 2005, there were 302,000 shares of common stock reserved for issuance upon exercise
of outstanding stock options. The outstanding options are currently exercisable at exercise prices
ranging from $2.25 to $5.63 per share. We anticipate that the trading price of our common stock at
the time of exercise of any such outstanding options will exceed the exercise price under those
options. Thus such exercise will have a dilutive effect on our shareholders.
The market price for our common stock is subject to fluctuation
The trading price of our common stock has from time to time fluctuated widely. The trading price
may similarly fluctuate in the future in response to quarter-to-quarter variations in our operating
results, announcements of innovations or new products by us or our competitors, general conditions
in the semiconductor industry and other events or factors. In addition, in recent years, broad
stock market indices in general, and the securities of technology companies in particular, have
experienced substantial price fluctuations on a daily basis. Fluctuations in the trading price of
our common stock may adversely affect our liquidity.
ITEM 7A QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Interest Rate Risk We do not use derivative financial instruments in our investment
portfolio. Our investment portfolio is generally comprised of cash deposits. Our policy is to
place these investments in instruments that meet high credit quality standards. These securities
are subject to interest rate risk, and could decline in value if interest rates fluctuate and thus
subject us to market risk due to those fluctuations. Due to the short duration and conservative
nature of our investment portfolio, we do not expect any material loss with respect to our
investment portfolio, though no assurances can be given that material losses will not occur.
The interest on our loans and lines of credit range from 4.19% to 7.25% per annum. As of June 30,
2005, the outstanding aggregate principal balance on these loans and lines of credit was
approximately $1,625. These interest rates are subject to change and we cannot predict an increase
or decrease in rates, if any.
36
Table of Contents
There- | Fair | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Fiscal year ending June 30, | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | after | Total | Value | ||||||||||||||||||
Loans: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
denominated by Singapore dollars |
$ | 198 | $ | 66 | | | $ | 264 | $ | 264 | ||||||||||||||
Interest is at the banks prime rate (5.75%
at June 30, 2005) plus 0.5% per annum |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
denominated by Singapore dollars |
$ | 62 | $ | 21 | | | $ | 83 | $ | 83 | ||||||||||||||
Interest is at the banks prime rate (2.95% at
June 30, 2005) plus 2.64% per annum |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
denominated by Singapore dollars |
$ | 162 | $ | 171 | $ | 15 | | $ | 348 | $ | 348 | |||||||||||||
Interest is at the banks prime rate (4.25% at
June 30, 2005) plus 1% per annum |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
denominated by Singapore dollars |
$ | 126 | $ | 134 | $ | 89 | | $ | 349 | $ | 349 | |||||||||||||
Interest is at the banks prime rate (4.25% at
June 30, 2005) plus 1% per annum |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
denominated by Thailand baht |
$ | 58 | $ | 58 | $ | 30 | | $ | 146 | $ | 146 | |||||||||||||
Interest is at a fixed rate (4.5% at
June 30, 2005) per annum |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
denominated Irish pound |
$ | 32 | $ | 26 | $ | 2 | | $ | 60 | $ | 60 | |||||||||||||
Interest is at the banks prime rate (2.09% at
June 30, 2005) plus 3.5% per annum |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
denominated Irish pound |
$ | 17 | $ | 11 | $ | 11 | | $ | 39 | $ | 39 | |||||||||||||
Interest is
at the banks prime rate (2.11% at
June 30, 2005) plus 3% per annum |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Subtotal |
$ | 655 | $ | 487 | 147 | | $ | 1,289 | $ | 1,289 | ||||||||||||||
Line of credit: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
denominated by Singapore dollars |
$ | 119 | | | | $ | 119 | $ | 119 | |||||||||||||||
Interest is
at the banks prime rate (5.75%
at June 30, 2005) plus 0.25% per annum |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
denominated by Singapore dollars |
$ | 217 | | | | $ | 217 | $ | 217 | |||||||||||||||
Interest is
at the banks prime rate (4.25%
at June 30, 2005) plus 1.25% per annum |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
$ | 336 | $ | | $ | | $ | | $ | 336 | $ | 336 | |||||||||||||
Total |
$ | 991 | $ | 487 | $ | 147 | $ | | $ | 1,625 | $ | 1,625 | ||||||||||||
Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risk Although the majority of our sales, cost of
manufacturing and marketing are transacted in U.S. dollars, significant portions of our revenue are
denominated in Singapore and Euro dollars, Malaysian ringgit, Thai baht and other currencies.
Consequently, a portion of our costs, revenue and operating margins may be affected by fluctuations
in exchange rates, primarily between the U.S. dollar and such foreign currencies. We are also
affected by fluctuations in exchange rates if there is a mismatch between our foreign currency
denominated assets and liabilities. Foreign currency translation adjustments resulted in an
increase of $25 to shareholders equity for fiscal 2005, an increase of $155 to shareholders
equity for fiscal 2004 and an increase of $18 to shareholders equity for fiscal 2003.
We try to reduce our risk of foreign currency fluctuations by purchasing certain equipment and
supplies in U.S. dollars and seeking payment, when possible, in U.S. dollars. However, we may not
be successful in our attempts to mitigate our exposure to exchange rate fluctuations. Those
fluctuations could have a material adverse effect on the Companys financial results.
ITEM 8 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
The information called for by this item is included in the Companys consolidated financial
statements beginning on page 48 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
37
Table of Contents
ITEM 9 CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
None.
ITEM 9A CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
An evaluation was carried out by the Companys Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer (the principal executive and principal financial officers, respectively, of the Company) of
the effectiveness of the Companys disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e)
or 15d-15(e) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) as of June 30,
2005, the end of the period covered by this Form 10-K. Based upon that evaluation, the Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that these disclosure controls and
procedures were effective. During the period covered by this report, there have been no changes in
the Companys internal control over financial reporting that have materially affected or are
reasonably likely to materially affect the Companys internal control over financial reporting.
ITEM 9B OTHER INFORMATION
Not applicable.
PART III
The information required by Items 10 through 14 of Part III of this Form 10-K (information
regarding our directors and executive officers, executive compensation, security ownership of
certain beneficial owners, management, related stockholder matters, and certain relationships and
related transactions and principal accountant fees and services, respectively) is hereby
incorporated by reference from the Companys Proxy Statement to be filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission within 120 days after the end of fiscal 2005.
PART IV
ITEM 15 EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
(a) (1 and 2) FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SCHEDULES:
The following financial statements, including notes thereto and the independent
auditors report with respect thereto, are filed as part of this Annual Report on Form
10-K, starting on page 47 hereof:
1. | Report of Independent Public Registered Accounting Firm | ||
2. | Consolidated Balance Sheets | ||
3. | Consolidated Statements of Income and Comprehensive (Loss) Income | ||
4. | Consolidated Statements of Shareholders Equity | ||
5. | Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows | ||
6. | Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements |
(b) EXHIBITS:
Number | Description | |
3.1
|
Articles of Incorporation, as currently in effect. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 1988.] | |
3.2
|
Bylaws, as currently in effect. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 1988.] | |
10.1
|
Credit Facility Letter dated January 4, 2001, between Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. and Standard Chartered Bank. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2001.] | |
10.2
|
1998 Stock Option Plan. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 1 to the Companys proxy statement filed under regulation 14A on October 27, 1997.] ** |
38
Table of Contents
Number | Description | |
10.3
|
Directors Stock Option Plan. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2 to the Companys proxy statement filed under regulation 14A on October 27, 1997.] ** | |
10.4
|
Real Estate Lease dated February 1, 1999 between Martinvale Development Company and Universal Systems. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 1999.] | |
10.5
|
Real Estate Lease dated February 16, 2001 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1004 Toa Payoh North #07-01/07 and #03-01/03. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2001.] | |
10.6
|
Real Estate Lease dated May 13, 1999 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1004 Toa Payoh North #03-16/17. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2001.] | |
10.7
|
Real Estate Lease dated October 13, 1999 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1004 Toa Payoh North #01-08/15. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2001.] | |
10.8
|
Real Estate Lease dated December 7, 2000 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1004 Toa Payoh North #01-16/17. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2001.] | |
10.9
|
Real Estate Lease dated January 3, 2000 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1008 Toa Payoh North #03-01/06. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2001.] | |
10.10
|
Real Estate Lease dated October 13, 1999 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1008 Toa Payoh North #03-09/15 and #03-16/18. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2001.] | |
10.11
|
Real Estate Lease dated May 2, 2000 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1008 Toa Payoh North #01-08. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.19 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2001.] | |
10.12
|
Real Estate Lease dated September 12, 2000 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1008 Toa Payoh North #07-17/18. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.20 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2001.] | |
10.13
|
Real Estate Lease dated October 30, 2000 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1008 Toa Payoh North #07-01. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2001.] | |
10.14
|
Real Estate Lease dated February 26, 2002 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1004 Toa Payoh North #02-11/15. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2002.] | |
10.15
|
Real Estate Lease dated June 10, 2002 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1004 Toa Payoh North #02-08/10. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2002.] | |
10.16
|
Credit Facility Letter dated November 16, 2001 and June 24, 2002, between Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. and Standard Chartered Bank. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.16 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2002.] | |
10.17
|
Credit Facility Letter dated July 24, 2002, between Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. and OCBC Bank. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2002.] | |
10.18
|
Credit Facility Letter dated May 21, 2002, between Trio-Tech (M) Sdn Bhd and HSBC Bank Malaysia Berhad. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.18 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2002.] |
39
Table of Contents
Number | Description | |
10.19
|
Credit Facility Letter dated January 22, 2002, between Trio-Tech (KL) Sdn Bhd and Public Bank Berhad. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.19 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2002.] | |
10.20
|
Real Estate Lease dated November 8, 2001 between Elbar Investments, L.P. and Trio-Tech International for 14731 Califa Street, Van Nuys. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 23.1 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2002.] | |
10.21
|
Amendment to the Directors Stock Option Plan [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.21 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2002.] ** | |
10.22
|
Credit Facility Letter dated January 28, 2003, between Trio-Tech (M) Sdn Bhd and HSBC Bank Malaysia Berhad [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.22 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2003.] | |
10.23
|
Credit Facility Letter dated September 20, 2002, between KTS Incorporated and Bank of America. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.23 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2003.] | |
10.24
|
Real Estate Lease dated January 12, 2001 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Toa Payoh North #01-S3/S4. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.24 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2003.] | |
10.25
|
Sales and Purchase Agreement, dated March 29, 2004 between TS Matrix BHD. and Trio Tech (Malaysia) SDN BHD. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the Registrants Form 8-K filed on July 15, 2004.] | |
10.26
|
Real Estate Sublease, dated July 1, 2004 between TS Matrix BHD. and Trio Tech (Malaysia) SDN. BHD. for factory lot no. 11A Kawansan MIEL Sungai Way Baru (FTZ), Phase III Selangor Darul Ehsan. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Registrants Amended Form 8-K filed on August 20, 2004.] | |
10.27
|
Real Estate Lease dated April 28, 2004 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1004 Toa Payoh North #04-14/16 and #04-17. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.27 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2004.] | |
10.28
|
Real Estate Lease dated April 28, 2004 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1004 Toa Payoh North #03-08/10. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.28 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2004.] | |
10.29
|
Real Estate Lease dated April 19, 2004 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1008 Toa Payoh North #02-17. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.29 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2004.] | |
10.30
|
Real Estate Lease dated May 26, 2004 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1008 Toa Payoh North #02-15/16. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.30 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2004.] | |
10.31
|
Credit Facility Letter dated July 7, 2003, between Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd, and Hong Leong Finance Limited. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.31 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2004.] | |
10.32
|
Credit Facility Letter dated October 2, 2003, between Trio-Tech Bangkok and Kasikornbank Public Company Limited. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.32 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2004.] | |
10.33
|
Credit Facility Letter dated October 7, 2003, between Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd, and DBS Bank Ltd. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.33 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2004.] | |
10.34
|
Credit Facility Letter dated August 11, 2003 between Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. and Standard Chartered Bank. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.34 to the Registrants Annual Report on Form 10-K for June 30, 2004.] | |
10.35
|
Letter of Offer, dated June 3, 2005 between Globetronics Technology BHD. and Trio Tech International PTE. LTD.. [Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 99.1 to the Registrants Form 8-K filed on June 8, 2005.] | |
10.36
|
Real Estate Lease, dated December 1, 2003 between Trio Tech (Malaysia) SDN. BHD. and Amphenol Malaysia Sdn. Bhd. for factory plot no. 1A Phase 1, Bayan Lepas Free Trade Zone, 11900 Pulau Pinang . * |
40
Table of Contents
Number | Description | |
10.37
|
Real Estate Lease, dated December 6, 2004 between Malaysian Industrial Estates Berhad and Trio Tech (Malaysia) SDN. BHD. for factory lot no. 4 Kawansan MIEL Sungai Way Baru (FTZ), Phase III Selangor Darul Ehsan. * | |
10.38
|
Real Estate Lease, dated September 28, 2004 between Ascendas-Xinsu Development (Suzhou) Co., Ltd. and Trio Tech (SIP) Co., Ltd. for Block B #05-01/02 room 6 in Suzhou Industrial Park China 215021. * | |
10.39
|
Real Estate Lease, dated November 8, 2004 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1008 Toa Payoh North #03-07/08. * | |
10.40
|
Real Estate Lease, dated September 10, 2003 between JTC Corporation and Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. for Block 1008 Toa Payoh North #01-09/11. * | |
21.1
|
Subsidiaries of the Registrant (100% owned by the Registrant except as otherwise stated): | |
Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd., a Singapore Corporation | ||
Universal (Far East) Pte. Ltd., a Singapore Corporation | ||
Trio-Tech Reliability Services, a California Corporation | ||
Express Test Corporation, a California Corporation | ||
European Electronic Test Center. Ltd. a Cayman Islands Corporation | ||
Trio-Tech Malaysia, a Malaysia Corporation (55% owned by the Registrant) | ||
Trio-Tech Kuala Lumpur, a Malaysia Corporation (100% owned by Trio-Tech Malaysia) | ||
Trio-Tech Bangkok, a Thailand Corporation | ||
Trio-Tech Thailand, a Thailand Corporation | ||
Prestal Enterprise Sdn. Bhd., a Malaysia Corporation (76% owned by the Registrant) | ||
KTS Incorporated, dba Universal Systems, a California Corporation | ||
Trio-Tech (Suzhou) Co. Ltd., a China Corporation | ||
23.1
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm* | |
31.1
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of Principal Executive Officer of Registrant* | |
31.2
|
Rule 13a-14(a) Certification of Principal Financial Officer of Registrant* | |
32
|
Section 1350 Certification. * |
* | Filed electronically herewith. | |
** | Indicates management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements required to be filed as an exhibit to this report. |
41
Table of Contents
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.
TRIO-TECH INTERNATIONAL | ||||||
By: | /s/ Victor H.M. Ting | |||||
VICTOR H.M. TING | ||||||
Vice President and | ||||||
Chief Financial Officer | ||||||
Date: September 27, 2005 |
Pursuant to the requirement 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 capacity and on the dates
indicated.
/s/ A. Charles Wilson | September 27, 2005 | |||
A. Charles Wilson, Director | ||||
Chairman of the Board | ||||
/s/ S. W. Yong | September 27, 2005 | |||
S. W. Yong, Director | ||||
President, Chief Executive Officer | ||||
(Principal Executive Officer) | ||||
/s/ Victor H.M. Ting | September 27, 2005 | |||
Victor H.M. Ting | ||||
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer | ||||
(Principal Financial Officer) | ||||
/s/ Jason T. Adelman | September 27, 2005 | |||
Jason T. Adelman, Director | ||||
/s/ Richard M. Horowitz | September 27, 2005 | |||
Richard M. Horowitz, Director |
42
Table of Contents
Exhibit 23.1
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Trio-Tech International
Van Nuys, California
Van Nuys, California
We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 No.
333-38082 and Form S-8 No. 333-40102 of Trio-Tech International of our report dated September 15,
2005, relating to the consolidated financial statements which appear in this annual report on Form
10-K.
/s/ BDO Raffles
BDO Raffles
Singapore
Singapore
September 27, 2005
43
Table of Contents
Exhibit 31.1
CERTIFICATIONS
I, S. W. Yong, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Trio-Tech International, a California
corporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to
the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
Date: September 27, 2005 |
||
/s/ S. W. YONG | ||
S. W. Yong, Chief Executive | ||
Officer and President (Principal Executive Officer) |
44
Table of Contents
Exhibit 31.2
I, Victor H.M. Ting, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Trio-Tech International, a California
corporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to
the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and
procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth
fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
Date: September 27, 2005 |
||
/s/ VICTOR H.M. TING | ||
Victor H.M. Ting, Chief Financial Officer | ||
and Vice President (Principal Financial Officer) |
45
Table of Contents
Exhibit 32
SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION
Each of the undersigned, S.W. Yong, President and Chief Executive Officer of Trio-Tech
International, a California corporation (the Company), and Victor H.M. Ting, Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his
knowledge (1) the annual report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended June 30, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,
and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
/s/ S. W. YONG | ||
Name: S. W. Yong | ||
Title: President and Chief Executive Officer | ||
Date: September 27, 2005 | ||
/s/ VICTOR H. M. TING | ||
Name: Victor H.M. Ting | ||
Title: Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | ||
Date: September 27, 2005 |
A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided
to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
46
Table of Contents
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Board of Directors
Trio-Tech International
Van Nuys, California:
Trio-Tech International
Van Nuys, California:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Trio-Tech International and
subsidiaries (the Company) as of June 30, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements
of operations and comprehensive income (loss), shareholders equity, and cash flows for each of the
three years in the period ended June 30, 2005. These financial statements are the responsibility of
the Companys 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. The
Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control
over financial reporting. Our audits 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 Companys internal control
over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also 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,
as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits
provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects,
the financial position of Trio-Tech International and subsidiaries as of June 30, 2005 and 2004,
and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period
ended June 30, 2005 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America.
BDO Raffles
/s/ BDO Raffles |
||
Singapore September 15, 2005 |
47
Table of Contents
TRIO-TECH
INTERNATIONAL AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT NUMBER OF SHARES)
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||
2005 | 2004 | |||||||
ASSETS |
||||||||
CURRENT ASSETS: |
||||||||
Cash |
$ | 1,439 | $ | 1,357 | ||||
Short-term deposits |
3,211 | 5,649 | ||||||
Trade accounts receivable, less allowance for doubtful
accounts of $147 and $165 |
4,178 | 3,695 | ||||||
Other receivables |
142 | 105 | ||||||
Inventories, less provision for obsolete inventory
of $428 and $445 |
1,584 | 1,409 | ||||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
91 | 98 | ||||||
Total current assets |
10,645 | 12,313 | ||||||
PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT, Net |
7,176 | 5,202 | ||||||
OTHER INTANGIBLE ASSETS, Net |
386 | | ||||||
OTHER ASSETS |
138 | 485 | ||||||
TOTAL ASSETS |
$ | 18,345 | $ | 18,000 | ||||
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
||||||||
CURRENT LIABILITIES: |
||||||||
Line of credit |
$ | 336 | $ | 146 | ||||
Accounts payable |
1,681 | 2,316 | ||||||
Accrued expenses |
2,598 | 2,166 | ||||||
Income taxes payable |
168 | 49 | ||||||
Current portion of notes payable |
655 | 506 | ||||||
Current portion of capital leases |
123 | 246 | ||||||
Current portion of deferred tax liabilities |
275 | 195 | ||||||
Total current liabilities |
5,836 | 5,624 | ||||||
NOTES PAYABLE, net of current portion |
634 | 583 | ||||||
CAPITAL LEASES, net of current portion |
110 | 210 | ||||||
DEFERRED TAX LIABILITIES |
407 | 449 | ||||||
TOTAL LIABILITIES |
6,987 | 6,866 | ||||||
MINORITY INTEREST |
2,061 | 2,110 | ||||||
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY: |
||||||||
Common stock; no par value, 15,000,000 shares authorized; 2,976,042 shares issued and outstanding as at Jun. 30, 2005, and 2,964,542 shares issued and outstanding as at Jun. 30, 2004, respectively |
9,554 | 9,527 | ||||||
Paid-in capital |
284 | 284 | ||||||
Accumulated deficit |
(298 | ) | (519 | ) | ||||
Accumulated other comprehensive loss-translation adjustments |
(243 | ) | (268 | ) | ||||
Total shareholders equity |
9,297 | 9,024 | ||||||
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
$ | 18,345 | $ | 18,000 | ||||
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
- 48 -
Table of Contents
TRIO-TECH INTERNATIONAL AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE)
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE)
Note | Years Ended | |||||||||||||||
Jun. 30 | Jun. 30 | Jun. 30 | ||||||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||||||
NET SALES |
||||||||||||||||
Product sales |
$ | 13,754 | $ | 10,246 | $ | 11,741 | ||||||||||
Services |
11,940 | 8,908 | 9,505 | |||||||||||||
25,694 | 19,154 | 21,246 | ||||||||||||||
COST OF SALES |
||||||||||||||||
Cost of goods sold |
11,386 | 8,145 | 10,395 | |||||||||||||
Cost of service rendered |
8,144 | 6,309 | 5,850 | |||||||||||||
19,530 | 14,454 | 16,245 | ||||||||||||||
GROSS PROFIT |
6,164 | 4,700 | 5,001 | |||||||||||||
OPERATING EXPENSES: |
||||||||||||||||
General and administrative |
4,695 | 3,769 | 3,992 | |||||||||||||
Selling |
1,059 | 875 | 702 | |||||||||||||
Research and development |
93 | 117 | 121 | |||||||||||||
Impairment loss |
70 | 4 | 358 | |||||||||||||
Loss (gain) on disposal of property, plant and equipment |
1 | (101 | ) | 115 | ||||||||||||
Total |
5,918 | 4,664 | 5,288 | |||||||||||||
INCOME (LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS |
246 | 36 | (287 | ) | ||||||||||||
OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE) |
||||||||||||||||
Interest expense |
(176 | ) | (120 | ) | (185 | ) | ||||||||||
Other income |
15 | 323 | 372 | 347 | ||||||||||||
Total |
147 | 252 | 162 | |||||||||||||
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE
INCOME TAXES AND MINORITY INTEREST |
393 | 288 | (125 | ) | ||||||||||||
INCOME TAX EXPENSES |
9 | 170 | 13 | 94 | ||||||||||||
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE MINORITY INTEREST |
223 | 275 | (219 | ) | ||||||||||||
MINORITY INTEREST |
(2 | ) | (55 | ) | 138 | |||||||||||
NET INCOME (LOSS) ATTRIBUTABLE TO
COMMON SHARES |
221 | 220 | (81 | ) | ||||||||||||
EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 0.07 | $ | 0.07 | $ | (0.03 | ) | |||||||||
Diluted |
$ | 0.07 | $ | 0.07 | $ | (0.03 | ) | |||||||||
WEIGHTED AVERAGE NUMBER OF COMMON AND
POTENTIAL COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
2,968 | 2,939 | 2,928 | |||||||||||||
Diluted |
2,992 | 3,000 | 2,928 | |||||||||||||
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS): |
||||||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
221 | 220 | (81 | ) | ||||||||||||
Unrealized loss on investment |
| (45 | ) | 21 | ||||||||||||
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
25 | 155 | 18 | |||||||||||||
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS) |
$ | 246 | $ | 330 | $ | (42 | ) | |||||||||
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
- 49 -
Table of Contents
TRIO-TECH INTERNATIONAL AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY (IN THOUSANDS)
Accum- | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
ulated | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Common Stock | Retained | Other | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Number | Additional | Earnings/ | Compre- | |||||||||||||||||||||
of | Paid-in | Accumulated | hensive | |||||||||||||||||||||
Shares | Amount | Capital | Deficit | (Loss) | Total | |||||||||||||||||||
Balance, June 30, 2002 |
2,927 | $ | 9,423 | $ | 270 | $ | (658 | ) | $ | (417 | ) | $ | 8,618 | |||||||||||
Stock compensation due
to issuance of options |
14 | 14 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Net loss |
(81 | ) | (81 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized gain in
marketable
securities (net of
tax) |
21 | 21 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Translation adjustment |
18 | 18 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, June 30, 2003 |
2,927 | 9,423 | 284 | (739 | ) | (378 | ) | 8,590 | ||||||||||||||||
Cash received from stock
options exercised |
37 | 104 | 104 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net income |
220 | 220 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Unrealized loss
in marketable
securities (net of
tax) |
(45 | ) | (45 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Translation adjustment |
155 | 155 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, June 30, 2004 |
2,964 | 9,527 | 284 | (519 | ) | (268 | ) | 9,024 | ||||||||||||||||
Cash received from stock
options exercised |
12 | 27 | 27 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net income |
221 | 221 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Translation adjustment |
25 | 25 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance, June 30, 2005 |
2,976 | $ | 9,554 | $ | 284 | $ | (298 | ) | $ | (243 | ) | $ | 9,297 | |||||||||||
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
- 50 -
Table of Contents
TRIO-TECH INTERNATIONAL AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASHFLOW (IN THOUSANDS)
Years Ended | ||||||||||||
Jun. 30, | Jun. 30, | Jun. 30, | ||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: |
||||||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 221 | $ | 220 | $ | (81 | ) | |||||
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to
net cash provided by operating activities: |
||||||||||||
Depreciation and amortization |
1,521 | 1,145 | 1,271 | |||||||||
Bad debt (recovery) expense, net |
(18 | ) | 14 | (17 | ) | |||||||
Inventory provision |
45 | | 48 | |||||||||
Interest income on short-term deposits |
(52 | ) | (63 | ) | (67 | ) | ||||||
Impairment loss |
70 | 4 | 358 | |||||||||
Stock compensation |
| | 14 | |||||||||
(Gain) loss on sale of property and equipment |
1 | (101 | ) | 115 | ||||||||
(Gain) loss on disposal of marketable securities |
| (115 | ) | (49 | ) | |||||||
Deferred tax provision (benefit) |
38 | (67 | ) | 42 | ||||||||
Minority interest |
2 | 55 | (138 | ) | ||||||||
Changes in operating assets and liabilities (excluding business acquisition): |
||||||||||||
Accounts receivable, net |
(465 | ) | (66 | ) | 522 | |||||||
Other receivables |
(37 | ) | (200 | ) | (503 | ) | ||||||
Other assets |
(105 | ) | 9 | 389 | ||||||||
Inventories |
(220 | ) | (360 | ) | 385 | |||||||
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
7 | 30 | (4 | ) | ||||||||
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
(203 | ) | 1,305 | (856 | ) | |||||||
Income taxes payable |
119 | (7 | ) | (50 | ) | |||||||
Net cash provided by operating activities |
924 | 1,803 | 1,379 | |||||||||
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: |
||||||||||||
Proceeds from maturing short-term deposits |
5,489 | 3,537 | 7,711 | |||||||||
Investments in short-term deposits |
(2,999 | ) | (4,815 | ) | (5,925 | ) | ||||||
Capital expenditures |
(2,306 | ) | (950 | ) | (1,020 | ) | ||||||
Purchase of marketable securities |
| (4 | ) | (537 | ) | |||||||
Acquisition of business in Malaysia |
(1,126 | ) | (92 | ) | | |||||||
Proceeds from disposal of marketable securities |
| 555 | 665 | |||||||||
Proceeds from sale of property and equipment |
1 | 241 | | |||||||||
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities |
(941 | ) | (1,528 | ) | 894 | |||||||
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES: |
||||||||||||
Net payments and borrowings on lines of credit |
190 | (155 | ) | (932 | ) | |||||||
Principal payments of debt and capital leases |
(909 | ) | (1,359 | ) | (1,284 | ) | ||||||
Proceeds from long-term debt |
862 | 999 | 535 | |||||||||
Dividends paid to minority interest |
(53 | ) | (53 | ) | (70 | ) | ||||||
Cash received from stock options exercised |
27 | 104 | | |||||||||
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities |
117 | (464 | ) | (1,751 | ) | |||||||
EFFECT OF EXCHANGE RATE CHANGES ON CASH |
(18 | ) | 51 | (34 | ) | |||||||
NET INCREASE (DECREASE) IN CASH |
82 | (138 | ) | 488 | ||||||||
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, BEGINNING OF YEAR |
1,357 | 1,495 | 1,007 | |||||||||
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS, END OF YEAR |
$ | 1,439 | $ | 1,357 | $ | 1,495 | ||||||
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION |
||||||||||||
Cash paid during the year for: |
||||||||||||
Interest |
$ | 176 | $ | 120 | $ | 182 | ||||||
Income taxes |
$ | 13 | $ | 90 | $ | 105 | ||||||
NON-CASH INVESTING AND FINANCING ACTIVITIES |
||||||||||||
Property, plant and equipment purchase under capital leases |
$ | 24 | $ | 135 | $ | 363 |
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
- 51 -
Table of Contents
TRIO-TECH INTERNATIONAL AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2005, 2004 AND 2003 (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AND NUMBER OF SHARES)
YEARS ENDED JUNE 30, 2005, 2004 AND 2003 (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AND NUMBER OF SHARES)
1. ORGANIZATION AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION
Trio-Tech International (the Company or TTI thereafter) was incorporated in fiscal 1958
under the laws of the State of California. TTI provides third-party semiconductor testing and
burn-in services primarily through its laboratories in Southeast Asia. In addition, TTI operates
test facilities in the United States and Europe. The Company also designs, develops, manufactures
and markets a broad range of equipment and systems used in the manufacturing and testing of
semiconductor devices and electronic components. TTI conducts business in three business segments:
Testing Services, Manufacturing and Distribution. TTI has subsidiaries in the U.S., Singapore,
Malaysia, Thailand, China and Ireland as follows:
Ownership | Location | |||||
Express Test Corporation |
100 | % | Van Nuys, California | |||
Trio-Tech Reliability Services |
100 | % | Van Nuys, California | |||
KTS Incorporated, dba Universal Systems |
100 | % | San Jose, California | |||
European Electronic Test Centre. |
100 | % | Dublin, Ireland | |||
Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. |
100 | % | Singapore | |||
Universal (Far East) Pte. Ltd. |
100 | % | Singapore | |||
Trio-Tech Thailand |
100 | % | Bangkok, Thailand | |||
Trio-Tech Bangkok |
100 | % | Bangkok, Thailand | |||
Trio-Tech Malaysia |
55 | % | Penang and Selangor, Malaysia | |||
Trio-Tech Kuala Lumpur 100%
owned by
Trio-Tech
Malaysia |
55 | % | Selangor, Malaysia | |||
Prestal Enterprise Sdn. Bhd. |
76 | % | Selangor, Malaysia | |||
Trio-Tech (Suzhou) Co. Ltd. |
100 | % | Suzhou, China |
2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Principles of Consolidation The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, which include the
accounts of the Company and its subsidiaries. All significant inter-company accounts and
transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. The consolidated financial statements are
presented in U.S. dollars.
Use of 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. Among the more significant estimates included in these
financial statements are the estimated accounts receivable allowance for doubtful accounts, reserve
for obsolete inventory, and the deferred income tax asset allowance. Actual results could
materially differ from those estimates.
Accounting Period The Companys fiscal reporting period coincides with the 52-53 week period
ending on the last Friday in June for fiscal 2004 and 2003. Effective July 1, 2004, The Board of
Directors approved the change of the fiscal reporting period to end on the last day of June. The
fiscal year end dates for year ending June 30, 2005 and June 30, 2004 were June 30, 2005 and June
25, 2004 respectively. Fiscal 2005, 2004 and 2003 are 53-week, 52-week and 52-week reporting
periods, respectively.
Revenue Recognition Revenues generated from sales of products in the Manufacturing and
Distribution segments are recognized when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, delivery of
the products has occurred, customer acceptance has been obtained (which means the significant risks
and rewards of the ownership have been transferred to the customer), the price is fixed or
determinable and collectibility is reasonably assured. Certain products sold (in the Manufacturing
segment) require installation and training to be performed.
Revenue from product sales is also recorded in accordance with the provisions of Emerging Issues
Task Force (EITF) Statement 00-21 Revenue Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables and Staff
Accounting Bulletin (SAB) 104 Revenue Recognition in Financial Statements which generally
requires revenue earned on product sales involving multiple-elements to be allocated to each
element based on the relative fair values of those elements. Accordingly, the Company allocates
revenue to each element in a multiple-element arrangement based on the elements respective fair
value, with the fair value determined by the price charged when that element is sold and
specifically defined in a quotation or contract. The Company allocates a portion of the invoice
value to products sold and the remaining portion of invoice value to installation work in
proportion to the fair value of products
- 52 -
Table of Contents
sold and installation work to be performed. Training
elements are valued based on hourly rates, which the Company charges for these services when sold
apart from product sales. The fair value determination of products sold and the installation and
training work is also based on our specific historical experience of the relative fair values of
the elements if there is no easily determinable market price to be considered. In fiscal 2005 and
2004, the installation revenues generated in connection with product sales were immaterial and
included in the product sales revenue line on the consolidated statement of income. The Company
estimates an allowance for sales returns based on historical experience with product returns.
Revenue derived from testing service is recognized when testing services are rendered.
Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts During the normal course of
business, the Company extends unsecured credit to its customers. Typically, credit terms require
payment to be made between 30 to 60 days of the sale. We do not require collateral from our
customers. The Company maintains its cash accounts at credit worthy financial institutions.
The Company regularly evaluates and monitors the creditworthiness of each customer on a
case-by-case basis. The Company includes any account balances that are determined to be
uncollectible, along with a general reserve, in the overall allowance for doubtful accounts. After
all attempts to collect a receivable have failed, the receivable is written off against the
allowance. Based on the information available to management, the Company believed that its
allowance for doubtful accounts was adequate as of June 30, 2005.
Warranty Costs The Company provides for the estimated costs that may be incurred under its
warranty program at the time the sale is recorded. The Company estimates the warranty costs based
on the historical rates of warranty returns. The Company periodically assesses the adequacy of its
recorded warranty liability and adjusts the amounts as necessary. See Note 7 for the change in the
accrued warranty costs.
Short Term Deposits Short term deposits consist of bank balances and interest bearing deposits
having maturity of 1 to 12 months. As of June 30, 2005, approximately $670 of short-term deposits
were held in the Companys 55% owned Malaysian subsidiary. $510 of this amount was denominated in
the currency of Malaysia. Out of the $510, $139 is currently available for movement to overseas, as
authorized by the Central Bank of Malaysia. There are additional amounts available as dividends
(after making deductions for income tax) pursuant to Malaysian regulations.
As of June 30, 2004, approximately $2,011 of short-term deposits were held in the Companys 55%
owned Malaysian subsidiary. $1,742 of this amount was denominated in the currency of Malaysia. Out
of the $1,742, $147 was then available for movement to overseas, as authorized by the Central Bank
of Malaysia. There were additional amounts available as dividends (after making deductions for
income tax) pursuant to Malaysian regulations.
Investments in Marketable Securities Investments in marketable securities are accounted for under
the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 115. Marketable equity securities are
classified as available-for-sale. Available-for-sale securities are carried at fair value, with
the unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, reported in a separate component of shareholders
equity. Realized gains and losses and declines in value judged to be other than temporary on
available-for-sale securities are included in investment income. The Company recognized
comprehensive income (net of tax) of nil during the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005 and
comprehensive loss (net of tax) of $45 and comprehensive income (net of tax) of $21, during the
fiscal years ended June 30, 2004 and June 30, 2003, respectively, based on its proportionate
interest in the subsidiary where the marketable securities were recorded.
Inventories Inventories consisting principally of raw materials, works in progress, and finished
goods are stated at the lower of cost, using the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method, or market
value.
Property, Plant and Equipment Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost, less accumulated
depreciation and amortization. Depreciation is provided for over the estimated useful lives of the
assets using the straight-line method. Amortization of leasehold improvements is provided for over
the term of the leases or the estimated useful lives of the assets, whichever is the shorter, using
the straight-line method. Capital grants from the Industrial Development Authority in Ireland are
accounted for when claimed by reducing the cost of the related assets. The grants are amortized
over the depreciable lives of those assets.
Maintenance, repairs and minor renewals are charged directly to expense as incurred. Additions and
betterments to property and equipment are capitalized. When assets are disposed of, the related
cost and accumulated depreciation thereon are removed from the accounts and any resulting gain or
loss is included in the statement of operations.
Other intangible asset In accordance with SFAS No,. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets.
the Company identified one item of other intangible assets other than goodwill with a finite life
of five years during the process of acquiring business in Malaysia, which is the customer
relationship. The estimated fair value of this other intangible asset is approximately $482 and
should be amortized over a five-year period on a straight-line basis. The estimated annual
amortization will be approximately $96 for each of the next five years. No impairment loss was
recorded during fiscal 2005.
- 53 -
Table of Contents
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets Effective July 1, 2002, the Company applies the provisions of
Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of
Long-Lived Assets (SFAS No. 144) to property, plant and equipment, and other intangible assets
such as customer relationships. SFAS No. 144 requires that long-lived assets be reviewed for
impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an
asset may not be recoverable through the estimated undiscounted cash flows expected to result from
the use and eventual disposition of the assets. Whenever any such impairment exists, an impairment
loss will be recognized for the amount by which the carrying value exceeds the fair value.
In the fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, the Company recorded an impairment loss of approximately
$70 based on its examination of future undiscounted cash flows, which were generated by the
subsidiaries where certain long-lived assets (other intangible assets and certain fixed assets)
were used. The impairment loss of $70 consisted of machinery and equipment, furniture and fixtures,
and leasehold improvements (pertaining to Singapore operations) due to changes in demand for
certain burn-in services, which in turn made certain of our existing burn-in facilities obsolete.
In the fiscal year ended June 30, 2004, the Company recorded an impairment loss of approximately $4
based on its examination of future undiscounted cash flows, which are generated by the subsidiaries
where certain long-lived assets (certain fixed assets) were used. The impairment loss of $4 was
pertaining to the Thailand operation.
In the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003, the Company recorded an impairment loss of approximately
$358 based on its examination of future undiscounted cash flows, which are generated by the
subsidiaries where certain long-lived assets (certain fixed assets) were used. The impairment of
$358 consisted of machinery and equipment, furniture and fixtures, and leasehold improvements
(pertaining to the Malaysia and Singapore Testing operations) due to changes in demand for certain
burn-in services which in turn made certain of our existing burn-in facilities obsolete.
Leases The Company leased certain property, plant and equipment in the ordinary course of
business. The leases have varying terms. Some may include renewal and/or purchase options,
escalation clauses, restrictions, penalties or other obligations that the Company considers in
determining minimum lease payments. The leases are classified as either capital leases or
operating leases, as appropriate.
Management expects that in the normal course of business, operating leases will be renewed or
replaced by other leases. The future minimum operating lease payments, for which the Company is
contractually obligated as of June 30, 2005, are disclosed in Note 10.
Assets under capital leases are capitalized using interest rates appropriate at the inception of
each lease and are depreciated over either the estimated useful life of the asset or the lease term
on a straight-line basis. The present value of the related lease payments is recorded as a
contractual obligation. The future minimum annual capital lease payments are included in the total
future contractual obligations as disclosed in Note 10.
Advertising Costs Advertising and other promotional costs are expensed as incurred.
This expense was $39 in fiscal 2005, $25 in fiscal 2004 and $17 in fiscal 2003.
Comprehensive Income (Loss) The Company adopted Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No.
130, Reporting Comprehensive Income, (SFAS No. 130) issued by the FASB. SFAS No. 130
establishes standards for reporting and presentation of comprehensive income (loss) and its
components in a full set of general-purpose financial statements. The Company has chosen to report
comprehensive income (loss) in the statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss).
Comprehensive income (loss) is comprised of net income (loss) and all changes to shareholders
equity except those due to investments by owners and distributions to owners.
Foreign Currency Translation and Transactions The Singapore dollar, the national currency of the
Singapore, is the primary currency of the economic environment in which the operations in Singapore
are conducted. The Company also operates in Malaysia, Thailand, China and Ireland of which the
Malaysia ringgit, Thai baht, Renminbi and Euro dollars, respectively, are the national currencies.
The Company uses the United States dollar (U.S. dollars) for financial reporting purposes.
The Company translates assets and liabilities of its subsidiaries outside the U.S. into U.S.
dollars using the rate of exchange prevailing at the balance sheet date, and the statement of
income is translated at average rates during the reporting period. Adjustments resulting from the
translation of the subsidiaries financial statements from foreign currencies into U.S. dollars are
recorded in stockholders equity as part of accumulated comprehensive loss translation
adjustments. Gains or losses resulting from transactions denominated in currencies other than
functional currencies of the Companys subsidiaries are reflected in income for the reporting
period.
Income Taxes The Company accounts for income taxes using the liability method in accordance with
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No 109, Accounting for Income Taxes (SFAS No. 109).
SFAS No. 109 requires an entity to recognize deferred tax liabilities and assets. Deferred taxes
assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequence attributable to the difference
between the tax bases of assets and liabilities and their reported amounts in the financial
statements,
- 54 -
Table of Contents
which will result in taxable or deductible amounts in future years. Further, the effects of
enacted tax laws or rate changes are included as part of deferred tax expenses or benefits in the
period that covers the enactment date. Management believes that it is more likely than not that
these future benefits from these timing differences would not be realized. Accordingly, a full
valuation allowance has been provided as of June 30, 2005 and 2004.
For US income tax purposes no provision has been made for U.S. taxes on undistributed earnings of
overseas subsidiaries with which the Company intends to continue to reinvest. It is not
practicable to estimate the amount of additional tax that might be payable on the foreign earnings
if they were remitted as dividends, or lent to the Company, or if the Company should sell its stock
in the subsidiary. However, the Company believes that US foreign tax credits and net operating
losses available would substantially eliminate any additional tax effects.
Retained earnings It is the intention of the Company to reinvest earnings of its foreign
subsidiaries in the operations of those subsidiaries. Accordingly, no provision has been made for
U.S. income and foreign withholding taxes that would result if such earnings were repatriated.
These taxes are undeterminable at this time. The amount of earnings retained in subsidiaries was
$7,860 and $7,518 at June 30, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
Research and Development Costs The Company incurred research and development costs of $93 in
fiscal 2005, $117 in fiscal 2004 and $121 in fiscal 2003, which were charged to operating expenses
as incurred.
Stock Based Compensation Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting for
Stock-Based Compensation (SFAS No. 123), establishes a fair value method of accounting for
stock-based compensation plans and for transactions in which a company acquires goods or services
from employees and non-employees in exchange for equity instruments. SFAS No. 123 also gives the
option, with respect to employees only, to account for stock-based compensation utilizing the
intrinsic method, in accordance with Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25 (APB No. 25),
Accounting for Stock issued to Employees. The Company has adopted APB No. 25 and FIN 44 for
measurement and recognition of employee stock-based compensation.
The Company has adopted the intrinsic value method of accounting for employee stock options as
permitted by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting for Stock-based
Compensation (SFAS No. 123) and discloses the pro forma effect on net loss and loss per share as
if the fair value based method had been applied. For equity instruments, including stock options,
issued to non-employees, the fair value of the equity instruments or the fair value of the
consideration received, whichever is more readily determinable, is used to determine the value of
services or goods received and the corresponding charge to operations.
The following table illustrates the effect on net income (loss) and earnings (loss) per share as if
the Company had applied the fair value recognition provision of SFAS No. 123 to stock-based
employee compensation.
June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||
Net income (loss) : as reported |
$ | 221 | $ | 220 | $ | (81 | ) | |||||
Add: stock based employee compensation
included in reported income |
| | 14 | |||||||||
Deduct: total stock based employee
compensation expense determined under
fair value method for all awards |
(41 | ) | (42 | ) | (18 | ) | ||||||
Pro forma net income (loss) |
$ | 180 | $ | 178 | $ | (85 | ) | |||||
Income (loss) per share basic |
||||||||||||
As reported |
$ | 0.07 | $ | 0.07 | $ | (0.03 | ) | |||||
Pro forma |
$ | 0.06 | $ | 0.06 | $ | (0.03 | ) | |||||
Income (loss) per share diluted
|
||||||||||||
As reported |
$ | 0.07 | $ | 0.07 | $ | (0.03 | ) | |||||
Pro forma |
$ | 0.06 | $ | 0.06 | $ | (0.03 | ) |
As required by SFAS No. 123, the Company provides the following disclosure of estimated values for
these awards. The weighted-average grant-date fair value of options granted during fiscal 2005,
2004, and 2003 was $4.41, $2.66, and $2.25 per
-55-
Table of Contents
share, respectively, and aggregate $33, $42, and $18, respectively, for total options granted by
using the Black-Scholes option pricing model with the assumptions listed below:
Years Ended | ||||||||||||
June 30, 2005 | June 30, 2004 | June 30, 2003 | ||||||||||
Volatility |
33.5 36.8 | % | 41.9 | % | 37.2 | % | ||||||
Risk free interest rate |
2.89 3.27 | % | 2.76 | % | 2.27 - 2.93 | % | ||||||
Expected life (years) |
3.00 | 2.00 | 2.00 |
Earnings per Share The Company adopted SFAS No. 128, Earnings per Share (EPS). Basic Earnings
Per Share is computed by dividing net income available to common shareholders (numerator) by the
weighted average number of common shares outstanding (denominator) during the period. Diluted EPS
gives effect to all dilutive potential common shares outstanding during a period. In computing
diluted EPS, the average price for the period is used in determining the number of shares assumed
to be purchased from exercise of stock options and warrants.
Stock options to purchase 302,000 shares at prices ranging from $2.25 to $5.63 per share were
outstanding as at June 30, 2005. 97,000 options were excluded in the computation of diluted EPS
because the exercise price was greater than the weighted average market price of the common shares
and therefore were anti-dilutive.
Stock options to purchase 345,000 shares at prices ranging from $2.25 to $6.00 per share were
outstanding as at June 30, 2004. 100,000 options were excluded in the computation of diluted EPS
because the exercise price was greater than the weighted average market price of the common shares
and therefore were anti-dilutive.
Stock options to purchase 349,500 shares at prices ranging from $2.25 to $6.69 per share were
outstanding at June 30, 2003 349,500 options were excluded in the computation of diluted EPS
because the exercise price was greater than the weighted average market price of the common shares
and therefore were anti-dilutive.
The following table is a reconciliation of the weighted-average shares used in the computation of
basic and diluted EPS for the periods presented herein:
June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||
Net income (loss) used to compute basic
and diluted earnings (loss) per share |
$ | 221 | $ | 220 | $ | (81 | ) | |||||
Weighted average number of common
shares outstanding basic |
2,968 | 2,939 | 2,928 | |||||||||
Dilutive effect of stock options and warrants |
24 | 61 | | |||||||||
Number of shares used to compute
earnings per share diluted |
2,992 | 3,000 | 2,928 | |||||||||
Fair Values of Financial Instruments The carrying value of trade accounts receivable, accounts
payable and short-term deposits approximate their fair value due to their short-term maturities.
The carrying values of the Companys lines of credit and long-term debt are considered to
approximate their fair value because the interest rates are based on the interest rates that are
currently available to the Company for issuance of debt with similar terms and remaining
maturities.
Concentration of credit risk Financial instruments that subject the Company to credit
risk consist primarily of accounts receivable. Concentration of credit risk with respect to
accounts receivable is generally diversified due to the number of entities composing the Companys
customer base and their geographic dispersion. The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of
its customers for potential credit losses. The Company generally does not require collateral. The
Company believes that its credit policies do not result in significant adverse risk and
historically it has not experienced significant credit related losses.
The following table represents the changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts:
-56-
Table of Contents
Years Ended | ||||||||||||
June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||
Beginning |
$ | 165 | $ | 157 | $ | 174 | ||||||
Additions charged to cost and expenses |
44 | 18 | | |||||||||
Recovered |
(62 | ) | (4 | ) | (17 | ) | ||||||
Actual write-offs |
| (6 | ) | | ||||||||
Ending |
$ | 147 | $ | 165 | $ | 157 | ||||||
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements In December 2004, the FASB announced that SFAS No.
123(R) (revised December 2004), Share-Based Payment, sets accounting requirements for
share-based compensation to employees, including employee-stock-purchase-plans (ESPPs) and
provides guidance on accounting for awards to non-employees. This Statement will require the
Company to recognize in the income statement the grant-date fair value of stock options and other
equity-based compensation issued to employees, but expresses no preference for a type of valuation
model. For public entities, this Statement is effective for the first fiscal year beginning after
June 15, 2005. The impact of adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) will depend on levels of share-based
payments granted in the future. The Company adopted this Statement beginning July 1, 2005.
In November 2004, the FASB issued Statement of Accounting Standards No. 151, Inventory Costs, A
Amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4 (SFAS No. 151). SFAS No. 151 eliminates the so abnormal
criterion in ARB No. 43 Inventory Pricing. SFAS No. 151 no longer permits a company to
capitalize inventory costs on their balance sheets when the production defect rate varies
significantly from the expected rate. SFAS No. 151 reduces the differences between U.S. and
international accounting standards. SFAS No. 151 is effective for inventory costs incurred during
annual periods beginning after June 15, 2005. The Company does not believe that this pronouncement
will have a material effect on the Companys financial position and net income.
In December 2004, the FASB issued FASB Staff Position No. FAS109-1 (FSP FAS 109-1), Application of
FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes, for the Tax Deduction on Qualified Production
Activities Provided by the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004. The Jobs Creation Act provides a
deduction for income from qualified domestic production activities, to be phased in from 2005
through 2010, which is intended to replace the existing extra-territorial income exclusion for
foreign sales. In FSP 109-1, the FASB decided the deduction for qualified domestic production
activities should be accounted for as a special deduction under SFAS No. 109 rather than as a rate
reduction. Accordingly, any benefit from the deduction will be reported in the period in which the
deduction is claimed on the tax return, and no adjustment to deferred taxes at June 30, 2005 is
required.
The Jobs Creation Act also creates a temporary incentive for U.S. corporations to repatriate
accumulated income earned abroad by providing an 85 percent dividends received deduction for
certain dividends from controlled foreign corporations. The deduction is subject to a number of
limitations and uncertainty remains as to how to interpret numerous provisions in the Act. FSP
109-2 addresses when to reflect in the financial statements the effects of the one-time tax benefit
on the repatriation of foreign earnings. Under SFAS No. 109, companies are normally required to
reflect the effect of new tax law changes in the period of enactment. FSP 109-2 provides companies
additional time to determine the amount of earnings, if any, that they intend to repatriate under
the Jobs Creation Acts provisions. The Company is currently assessing the financial impact of
implementing FSP FAS 109-1 on the consolidated financial statements.
In December 2004, the FASB issued the Statement of Financial Account Standards No. 153, Exchange
of Nonmonetary Assets, An Amendment of APB Opinion No. 29 (SFAS No. 153). SFAS No 153 addresses
the measurement of exchanges of nonmonetary assets. SFAS No. 153 eliminates the exception from
fair value measurement for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive assets in paragraph 21(b) of
APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions, and replaces it with an exception for
exchanges that do not have commercial substance. SFAS No. 153 specifies that a nonmonetary exchange
has commercial substance if the future cash flows of the entity are expected to change
significantly as a result of the exchange. The provisions of SFAS No. 153 shall be effective for
nonmonetary asset exchanges occurring in fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2005. Earlier
application is permitted for nonmonetary asset exchanges occurring in fiscal periods beginning
after the date this Statement is issued. The provisions of this Statement shall be applied
prospectively. The Company does not believe that this pronouncement will have a material effect on
the Companys financial position and net income.
In May 2005, the FASB issued Statement No. 154, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections, a
replacement of APB Opinion No. 20, Accounting Changes, and Statement No. 3, Reporting Accounting
Changes in Interim Financial Statements. (SFAS No. 154). SFAS No. 154 changes the requirements
for the accounting for, and reporting of, a change in accounting principle. Previously, most
voluntary changes in accounting principles were required to be recognized by way of a cumulative
effect adjustment within net income during the period of the change. SFAS No. 154 generally
requires retrospective application to the
-57-
Table of Contents
prior period financial statements of voluntary changes in accounting principles. SFAS No. 154 is
effective for accounting changes made in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2005. However,
SFAS No. 154 does not change the transition provisions of any existing accounting pronouncements.
The Company does not believe the adoption of SFAS No. 154 will have a material effect on its
results of operations or financial condition.
Reclassification Certain reclassifications have been made to the previous years financial
statements to conform to current year presentation, with no effect on previously reported net
income.
3. INVENTORIES
Inventories consist of the following:
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||
2005 | 2004 | |||||||
Raw materials |
$ | 842 | $ | 652 | ||||
Work in progress |
608 | 700 | ||||||
Finished goods |
562 | 502 | ||||||
Less: provision for obsolete inventory |
(428 | ) | (445 | ) | ||||
$ | 1,584 | $ | 1,409 | |||||
4. PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT
Property, plant and equipment consist of the following:
Useful | June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||||
Life in years | 2005 | 2004 | ||||||||||
Building and improvements |
3-20 | $ | 816 | $ | 817 | |||||||
Leasehold improvements |
3-27 | 2,669 | 2,347 | |||||||||
Machinery and equipment |
3-7 | 7,020 | 4,655 | |||||||||
Furniture and fixtures |
3-5 | 420 | 363 | |||||||||
Equipment under capital leases |
3-5 | 1,322 | 1,279 | |||||||||
12,247 | 9,461 | |||||||||||
Less: |
||||||||||||
Accumulated depreciation and
amortization |
4,317 | 3,417 | ||||||||||
Accumulated amortization on
equipment under capital leases |
754 | 842 | ||||||||||
$ | 7,176 | $ | 5,202 | |||||||||
Depreciation and amortization expenses during fiscal year ended June 30, 2005, 2004 and 2003
were $1,521, of which $96 related to the intangible asset, $1,145 and $1,271, respectively.
5. LINES OF CREDIT
The lines of credit have various financial covenants. The Company was in compliance with
all such debt covenants at June 30, 2005 and 2004.
-58-
Table of Contents
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||
2005 | 2004 | |||||||
Revolving line of credit denominated by Singapore dollars payable to a
commercial bank for working capital purposes, to borrow up to $4,225
with an interest rate at the banks prime rate (5.75% at June 30, 2005
and 2004) plus 0.25% per annum. The line of credit is renewable in July
2006 and is collateralized by Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd.
accounts receivable. |
$ | 119 | $ | 146 | ||||
Revolving line of credit denominated by Singapore dollars payable to a
commercial bank for working capital purposes, to borrow up to $5,374
with an interest rate at the banks prime rate (4.25% at June 30, 2005)
plus 1.25% per annum. The line of credit is renewable in December 2005
and is collateralized by Trio-Tech International Pte. Ltd. fixed
deposits |
217 | | ||||||
Lines of credit |
$ | 336 | $ | 146 | ||||
6. | ACCRUED EXPENSES | |
Accrued expenses consist of the following: |
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||
2005 | 2004 | |||||||
Payroll and related |
$ | 1,182 | $ | 954 | ||||
Commissions |
113 | 64 | ||||||
Customer Deposits |
26 | 39 | ||||||
Legal and audit |
53 | 113 | ||||||
Sales tax |
285 | 271 | ||||||
Utilities |
188 | 201 | ||||||
Warranty |
155 | 162 | ||||||
Provision for sales volume rebate |
5 | 3 | ||||||
Provision for building sinking fund |
34 | 34 | ||||||
Accrued purchase of materials and fixed assets |
256 | 133 | ||||||
Unearned revenue |
123 | | ||||||
Other accrued expenses |
178 | 192 | ||||||
Total |
$ | 2,598 | $ | 2,166 | ||||
7. | WARRANTY ACCRUAL |
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||
2005 | 2004 | |||||||
Beginning |
$ | 162 | $ | 165 | ||||
Additions charged to cost and expenses |
43 | 41 | ||||||
Recovered |
| | ||||||
Actual write-offs |
(50 | ) | (44 | ) | ||||
Ending |
$ | 155 | $ | 162 | ||||
-59-
Table of Contents
8. | NOTES PAYABLE | |
Notes payable consists of the following: |
June 30, | June 30, | |||||||
2005 | 2004 | |||||||
Note payable denominated by Singapore dollars to a commercial bank for
purchasing certain equipment, matured in February 2005, bearing interest at
banks prime rate (5.75% at June 30, 2004) plus 1.5% per annum, with
monthly payments of principal and interest installments of $17 through
February 2005, collateralized by the relevant equipment, with a fixed
deposit and a corporate guarantee. This note was fully paid in February 2005. |
$ | | 145 | |||||
Note payable denominated by Singapore dollars to a commercial bank for
purchasing certain equipment, maturing in October 2006, bearing interest at
the banks prime rate (5.75% at June 30, 2005 and 2004) plus 0.5% per
annum, with monthly payments of principal and interest installments of
$16 through October 2006 with no collateral. |
264 | 455 | ||||||
Note payable denominated by Singapore dollars to a commercial bank for
purchasing certain equipment, maturing in October 2006, bearing interest at
the banks prime rate (2.95% at June 30, 2005 and 2004) plus 2.64% per
annum, with monthly payments of principal and interest installments of
$5 through October 2006, with no collateral. |
83 | 140 | ||||||
Note payable denominated by Singapore dollars to a commercial bank for
infrastructure investment, maturing in June 2007, bearing interest at the
banks prime rate (4.25% at June 30, 2005) plus 1% per annum, with
monthly payments of principal and interest installments of $15 through
June 2007, with no collateral. |
348 | | ||||||
Note payable denominated by Singapore dollars to a commercial bank for
infrastructure investment, maturing in February 2008, bearing interest at the
banks prime rate (4.25% at June 30, 2005) plus 1% per annum, with
monthly payments of principal and interest installments of $12 through
February 2008, with no collateral. |
349 | | ||||||
Note payable denominated by Thailand baht to a commercial bank for
extension of a building, maturing in December 2007, bearing interest at a
fixed rate (4.5% at June 30, 2005 and 2004) per annum, with monthly payments
of principal and interest installments of $6 through December 2007, with no
collateral. |
146 | 207 | ||||||
Mortgage note payable denominated in Irish pounds to the Industrial Credit
Corporation for purchasing a building, maturing in July 2007, bearing
interest at the banks prime rate (2.09% at June 30, 2005 and 2004) plus 3.5%
per annum, with monthly payments of principal and interest installments
of $3 through July 2007, collateralized by the relevant building. |
60 | 88 | ||||||
Mortgage note payable denominated by Irish pounds to the Industrial Credit
Corporation for purchasing a building, maturing in May 2008, bearing
interest at the banks prime rate (2.11% at June 30, 2005 and 2004) plus 3%
per annum, with monthly payments of principal and interest installments
of $1 through May 2008, collateralized by the relevant building. |
39 | 54 | ||||||
1,289 | 1,089 | |||||||
Less current portion |
(655 | ) | (506 | ) | ||||
Notes payable |
$ | 634 | $ | 583 | ||||
-60-
Table of Contents
Maturities of notes payable as of June 30, 2005 are as follows:
Year | ||||
Ending | ||||
June 30, | ||||
2006 |
$ | 655 | ||
2007 |
487 | |||
2008 |
147 | |||
Thereafter |
| |||
$ | 1,289 | |||
9. | INCOME TAXES |
The Company generates income or loss before income taxes and minority interest in the U.S., Singapore, Thailand, Malaysia, and Ireland, respectively, and files income tax returns in these countries. The summarized income or loss before income taxes and minority interest in the U.S. and foreign countries for the fiscal years ended June 30, 2005, 2004 and 2003 were as follows: |
June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||
U.S. |
$ | (118 | ) | $ | (87 | ) | $ | (231 | ) | |||
Foreign |
511 | 375 | 106 | |||||||||
$ | 393 | $ | 288 | $ | (125 | ) | ||||||
On a consolidated basis, the Companys net income tax provision (benefits) was as follows: |
June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||
Current: |
||||||||||||
Federal |
$ | | $ | | $ | | ||||||
State |
3 | 3 | 4 | |||||||||
Foreign |
129 | 77 | 48 | |||||||||
132 | 80 | 33 | ||||||||||
Deferred: |
||||||||||||
Foreign |
38 | (67 | ) | 42 | ||||||||
$ | 170 | $ | 13 | $ | 94 | |||||||
The reconciliation between the U.S. federal statutory tax rate and the effective income tax rate was as follows: |
June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||
Statutory federal tax rate |
34 | % | 34 | % | (34 | )% | ||||||
State taxes, net of federal benefit |
6 | 6 | (6 | ) | ||||||||
Foreign tax rate reduction |
(9 | ) | (37 | ) | 28 | |||||||
Other |
3 | | 4 | |||||||||
Changes in valuation allowance |
9 | 2 | 83 | |||||||||
Effective rate |
43 | % | 5 | % | 75 | % | ||||||
At June 30, 2005, the Company had net operating loss carry forwards of approximately $6.0 million for federal income tax purposes (which will expire through fiscal 2024) and $2.1 million for state income tax purposes (which will expire through fiscal 2009). Management believes that it is more likely than not that these future benefits from these timing differences would not be realized. Accordingly, a full valuation allowance has been provided as of June 30, 2005 and 2004. |
-61-
Table of Contents
The components of deferred income tax assets (liabilities) are as follows: |
June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||
2005 | 2004 | ||||||||
Deferred tax assets: |
|||||||||
Net operating loss carry forward |
$ | 2,470 | $ | 2,465 | |||||
Provision for obsolete inventory |
144 | 141 | |||||||
Fixed assets |
167 | 116 | |||||||
Allowance for doubtful accounts |
16 | 8 | |||||||
Accrued vacation |
13 | 10 | |||||||
Accrued expenses |
6 | 40 | |||||||
Other |
1 | 1 | |||||||
Total deferred tax assets |
2,817 | 2,781 | |||||||
Deferred tax liabilities: |
|||||||||
Depreciation on property, plant and equipment |
407 | 449 | |||||||
Other |
275 | 195 | |||||||
Total deferred income tax liabilities |
682 | 644 | |||||||
Subtotal |
2,135 | 2,137 | |||||||
Valuation allowance |
(2,817 | ) | (2,781 | ) | |||||
Net deferred tax liability |
$ | (682 | ) | $ | (644 | ) | |||
The change in valuation allowance was $36, $15 and $104 in fiscal 2005, 2004 and 2003, respectively. |
10. | COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES |
The Company leases certain of its facilities and equipment under long-term agreements expiring at various dates through fiscal 2009. Certain of these leases require the Company to pay real estate taxes and insurance and provide for escalation of lease costs based on certain indices. Future minimum payments under capital leases and non-cancelable operating leases as of June 30, 2005 and future minimum rental income under non-cancelable operating leases are as follows: |
Capital | Operating | Minimum | Net Operating | |||||||||||||
Year ending June 30, | Leases | leases | rental income | leases | ||||||||||||
2006 |
$ | 134 | $ | 698 | $ | (25 | ) | $ | 673 | |||||||
2007 |
74 | 447 | | 447 | ||||||||||||
2008 |
39 | 120 | | 120 | ||||||||||||
2009 |
8 | | | | ||||||||||||
Thereafter |
| | | | ||||||||||||
Total future minimum lease payments |
255 | $ | 1,265 | $ | (25 | ) | $ | 1,240 | ||||||||
Less amount representing interest |
(22 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Present value of net minimum lease payments |
233 | |||||||||||||||
Less current portion of capital lease obligations |
(123 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Long-term obligations under capital leases |
$ | 110 | ||||||||||||||
The Company entered into three sublease agreements with third parties to rent out the properties in Ireland and Malaysia. In January 2003, the Company rented out part of the property in Dublin, Ireland for five years, which expires in December 2007 with monthly rental income of approximately $9. In February 2003, the Company rented out a property in Batang Kali, Malaysia for three years, which expires in February 2006 with monthly rental income of approximately $3. In December 2003, the Company rented out another property in Malaysia for two years, which expires in December 2005. The monthly rental income is approximately $4. Total rental income from subleases amounted to $198 in fiscal 2005, $169 in fiscal 2004 and $89 in fiscal 2003. | ||
Total rental expense on all operating leases, both cancelable and non-cancelable, amounted to $788 in fiscal 2005, $658 in fiscal 2004 and $733 in fiscal 2003. |
-62-
Table of Contents
The Company is, from time to time, the subject of litigation claims and assessments arising out of matters occurring in its normal business operations. In the opinion of management, resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Companys financial statements. |
11. | TRANSACTIONS IN SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
Fiscal 2005 | ||
On July 1, 2004, the Board of Directors granted options under the 1998 Plan, covering 5,500 shares of Common Stock to 1 employee and 30,000 shares of Common Stock to 4 directors under the Directors Plan, all with an exercise price of $4.40 per share (equal to the market price at the grant date). The options granted to directors vested in full on the grant date. The option granted to the employee has a five-year contractual life and vested 25% on the grant date and will vest as to an additional 25% on each anniversary date. According to APB No. 25, no stock compensation was recognized for these options to acquire 35,500 shares of Common Stock. On the measurement date, there was no intrinsic value on these options. Therefore, no stock compensation expense was recognized for this transaction during fiscal 2005. | ||
On December 6, 2004, the Board of Directors granted options under the 1998 Plan, covering 4,500 shares of Common Stock to one employee with an exercise price of $4.50 per share (equal to the market price at the grant date). The option granted to the employee has a five-year contractual life and vested 25% on the grant date and will vest as to an additional 25% on each anniversary date. According to APB No. 25, no stock compensation was recognized for this option. On the measurement date, there was no intrinsic value on these options. Therefore, no stock compensation expense was recognized for this transaction during fiscal 2005. | ||
Option holders under the Directors Plan exercised options covering 10,000 shares of the Companys Common Stock with an exercise price of $2.25 per share. Consequently, the Company issued 10,000 shares of Common Stock in exchange for aggregate proceeds of $22. | ||
Option holders under the 1998 Plan exercised options covering 1,000 shares of the Companys Common Stock with an exercise price of $3.40 per share and options covering 500 shares at an exercise price of $2.66 per share. Consequently, the Company issued 1,500 shares of Common Stock in exchange for aggregate proceeds of $5. | ||
Fiscal 2004 | ||
On July 14, 2003, the Board of Directors granted options under the 1998 Plan, covering 61,000 shares of Common Stock to 30 employees and 35,000 shares of Common Stock to 4 directors under the Directors Plan, all with an exercise price of $2.66 per share (equal to the market price at the grant date). The options granted to directors vested in full on the grant date. The options granted to the employees have a five-year contractual life and vested 25% on the grant date and will vest as to an additional 25% on each anniversary date. According to APB No. 25, no stock compensation was recognized for these 96,000 options. On the measurement date, there was no intrinsic value on these options. Therefore, no stock compensation expense was recognized for this transaction during fiscal 2004. | ||
Option holders under the Directors Plan exercised options covering 5,000 shares of the Companys Common Stock with an exercise price of $2.72 per share. Consequently, the Company issued 5,000 shares of Common Stock in exchange for aggregate proceeds of $14. | ||
Option holders under the Directors Plan exercised options covering 25,000 shares of the Companys Common Stock with an exercise price of $2.82 per share. Consequently, the Company issued 25,000 shares of Common Stock in exchange for aggregate proceeds of $70. | ||
Option holders under the 1998 Plan exercised options covering 2,000 shares of the Companys Common Stock with an exercise price of $3.20 per share and options covering 5,000 shares at exercise price of $2.66 per share. Consequently, the Company issued 7,000 shares of Common Stock in exchange for aggregate proceeds of $20. | ||
Fiscal 2003 | ||
On July 16, 2002, the Board of Directors granted options under the Directors Plan covering 35,000 shares of Common Stock to 5 directors with an exercise price lower than the market price at the grant date. These options granted have a five-year contractual life and vested immediately. The Company recognized the stock compensation expense of $14 according to APB No. 25 on June 30, 2003. | ||
No options were exercised in fiscal 2003. | ||
On December 8, 1997, the Companys shareholders approved the Companys 1998 Stock Option Plan (the 1998 Plan) under which employees, officers, directors and consultants receive options to purchase the Companys common stock at a |
-63-
Table of Contents
price that is not less than 100 percent of the fair market value at the date of grant. Options under the 1998 Plan have a five-year contractual life and vest at the rate of 25% at the grant date and 25% at each anniversary after the granting date. There are 300,000 shares authorized for grant under the 1998 Plan, and options to acquire 165,000 shares were outstanding as of June 30, 2005. | ||
On December 8, 1997, the Companys shareholders approved the Directors Stock Option Plan (the Directors Plan under which duly elected non-employee Directors and the President (if he or she is a director of the Company) of the Company (currently four individuals) receive options to purchase the Companys common stock at a price equal to 85% of the fair market value of the underlying shares on the date of grant. Subsequent to July 1, 2003, the Board approved and granted options to purchase the Companys common stock at a price equal to 100% of the fair market value of the underlying shares on the date of grant. Each option granted under the Plan shall have a five-year contractual life and be exercisable immediately commencing as of the date of grant. There are 300,000 shares authorized for grant under the Directors Plan and options to acquire 137,000 shares were outstanding as of June 30, 2005. | ||
The following tables summarize the stock option and warrant activities for the three years ended June 30, 2003, 2004 and 2005: |
Number | Weighted | |||||||||||||||
Number | Weighted | of | Average | |||||||||||||
of | Average | Options | Exercise | |||||||||||||
Outstanding Options | Options | Price | Exercisable | Price | ||||||||||||
Beginning outstanding options at June 30, 2002 |
474,500 | $ | 4.27 | |||||||||||||
Granted |
35,000 | 2.25 | ||||||||||||||
Exercised |
| |||||||||||||||
Canceled |
(160,000 | ) | 4.49 | |||||||||||||
Total outstanding options at June 30, 2003 |
349,500 | 3.96 | 296,000 | $ | 4.05 | |||||||||||
Granted |
96,000 | 2.74 | ||||||||||||||
Exercised |
(37,000 | ) | 2.81 | |||||||||||||
Canceled |
(63,000 | ) | 3.99 | |||||||||||||
Total outstanding options at June 30, 2004 |
345,500 | $ | 3.68 | 278,875 | $ | 3.85 | ||||||||||
Granted |
40,000 | 4.41 | ||||||||||||||
Exercised |
(11,500 | ) | 3.67 | |||||||||||||
Canceled |
(72,000 | ) | 4.94 | |||||||||||||
Total outstanding options at June 30, 2005 |
302,000 | $ | 3.53 | 267,250 | $ | 3.57 | ||||||||||
Year Ended June 30, 2005 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Options Outstanding | Options Exercisable | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Weighted Average | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Weighted | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Grant | Number | Remaining | Average | Number | ||||||||||||||||||||
Price Range | Outstanding | Contractual Life | Exercise Price | Exercisable | Exercise Price | |||||||||||||||||||
$2.50 $3.69 |
205,000 | 1.68 | 2.84 | 180,250 | 2.87 | |||||||||||||||||||
$3.70 $4.69 |
45,000 | 4.05 | 4.39 | 35,000 | 4.39 | |||||||||||||||||||
$4.70 $5.69 |
52,000 | 0.09 | 5.47 | 52,000 | 5.47 | |||||||||||||||||||
302,000 | 2.24 | 3.53 | 267,250 | 3.57 | ||||||||||||||||||||
12. | CONCENTRATION OF CUSTOMERS | |
The Company had three major customers that accounted for the following accounts receivable and sales during the fiscal years ended: |
-64-
Table of Contents
Years ended June 30, | 2005 | 2004 | 2003 | |||||||||
Sales |
||||||||||||
Customer A |
11 | % | 15 | % | 17 | % | ||||||
Customer B |
35 | % | 37 | % | 33 | % | ||||||
Customer C |
26 | % | | | ||||||||
Accounts Receivable |
||||||||||||
Customer A |
9 | % | 15 | % | 10 | % | ||||||
Customer B |
36 | % | 32 | % | 28 | % | ||||||
Customer C |
23 | % | | |
13. | UNUSED FINANCING FACILITIES | |
The Company has various credit facilities available to it. The following table summarizes the credit facilities available to the Company and the unutilized portion of the facilities at June 30, 2005: |
Entity with Facility | Type of | Interest | Expiry dates | Credit | Unused | |||||||||||||||
Trio-Tech Malaysia | Line of Credit | Banks prime rate
(6% as at June 30,
2005) plus 1% per
annum |
January 2006 | $ | 106 | $ | 75 | |||||||||||||
Trio-Tech Bangkok | Line of Credit | Banks prime rate
(6% as at June 30,
2005) plus 1% per
annum |
October 2005 | 97 | 97 | |||||||||||||||
Trio-Tech Singapore | Line of Credit | (See Note 5) |
(See Note 5) | 9,599 | 9,263 | |||||||||||||||
$ | 9,802 | $ | 9,435 | |||||||||||||||||
14. | ACQUISITION OF A BUSINESS | |
On July 1, 2004, the Company acquired certain assets from TS Matrix Bhd. (Seller) utilized by the burn-in testing division of Seller for an aggregate cash purchase price of approximately $1,218. Seller is one of our competitors. The Company paid approximately $92 by making a deposit in fiscal 2004 and $1,126 in cash in fiscal 2005, of which approximately $395 was financed through a bank guaranteed note which would mature on December 31, 2004. Our objectives in acquiring the burn-in testing division were to service a large electronic device manufacturer with whom we had been pursuing a business relationship for some time and to increase our market share in testing services. Upon completion of the acquisition, the customer signed a five-year agreement with the Company to provide testing services. The value of obtaining this customer relationship intangible was included in other intangible assets in the amount of $482. Results of the operations for the burn-in testing business were included in the Companys income statement effective July 1, 2004. | ||
In accordance with the Statement of Financial Accounting Standard (SFAS) No. 141, Business Combinations, the Company allocated the purchase price to the tangible assets and intangible assets acquired based on their estimated fair values. The fair value assigned to intangible assets acquired was based on estimates and assumptions determined by the management. Other intangibles with finite lives are amortized on a straight-line basis over their respective useful lives. The total purchase price was allocated as follows (in thousands): |
Total purchase price: |
||||
Cash |
$ | 823 | ||
Notes payable |
395 | |||
$ | 1,218 | |||
-65-
Table of Contents
Allocated as follows: |
||||
Fixed assets |
||||
Machinery and equipment |
$ | 729 | ||
Leasehold improvements |
7 | |||
736 | ||||
Intangible assets customer relationship |
482 | |||
$ | 1,218 | |||
The excess purchase price over the fair value of tangible assets acquired was attributable to the customer relationship obtained from the aforementioned business acquisition and recorded as other intangible assets. No goodwill is recognized in this context. The customer relationship intangible will be amortized over its economic life based on the contract term as stated in the sales agreement with the customer on a straight-line method over five years. | ||
The value of customer relationship was originally presented as $493 in our Form 8-K. After further identification conducted after July 1, 2004, the Company found that a value of approximately $11 from an equipment was included in this $493. Consequently, a reclassification was made to present the proper value of $482 for the customer relationship, which was started to be amortized over five years from July 1, 2004. | ||
Pro Forma Financial Information | ||
The unaudited financial information in the table below summarizes the combined results of the operations of the Company and the new burn-in testing division in Malaysia for the year ended June 30, 2004 as if the acquisition had occurred on July 1, 2003. The results from operations for the year ended June 30, 2005 included the business acquisition that was completed at the beginning of the first quarter of fiscal 2005. | ||
The pro forma financial information is presented for informational purposes only and is not necessarily indicative of the results of operations that would have been achieved had the acquisition taken place at the beginning of the year ended June 30, 2004. The unaudited pro forma combined statement of operations for the year ended June 30, 2004 combines the historical results for the Company for year ended June 30, 2004 and the historical results for the new burn-in testing division for the period preceding the acquisition on July 1, 2004. The following amounts are in thousands. |
UNAUDITED PRO FORMA STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2004
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2004
Historical | ||||||||||||||||
Historical | ||||||||||||||||
Historical | information of | |||||||||||||||
information of | the acquired | Proforma | ||||||||||||||
the Company | business | Adjustments | Proforma | |||||||||||||
Net sales |
$ | 19,154 | $ | 1,816 | $ | | $ | 20,970 | ||||||||
Net income |
$ | 220 | $ | 169 | $ | (96 | )(a) | $ | 293 | |||||||
Basic earnings per share |
$ | 0.07 | $ | 0.10 | ||||||||||||
Diluted earnings per share |
$ | 0.07 | $ | 0.10 | ||||||||||||
Basic weighted average
common shares outstanding |
2,939 | 2,939 | ||||||||||||||
Diluted weighted average
common shares outstanding |
3,000 | 3,000 |
(a) | Net earnings were adjusted for pro forma purposes to recognize the effect of the amortization of the other intangible assets over its economic life of five years on a straight-line method, assuming that the acquisition took place from July 1, 2003. |
-66-
Table of Contents
15. | OTHER INCOME | |
Other income consists of the following: |
June 30, | June 30, | June 30, | ||||||||||
2005 | 2004 | 2003 | ||||||||||
Interest income |
$ | 58 | $ | 78 | $ | 83 | ||||||
Rental income |
198 | 169 | 89 | |||||||||
Royalty income |
| | 20 | |||||||||
Dividend income |
9 | 11 | 25 | |||||||||
Exchange (loss) gain |
10 | (12 | ) | 9 | ||||||||
Sales of other products |
18 | 6 | 52 | |||||||||
Gain (loss) on disposal on marketable securities |
| 115 | 49 | |||||||||
Other miscellaneous income |
30 | 5 | 20 | |||||||||
Total |
$ | 323 | $ | 372 | $ | 347 | ||||||
16. | BUSINESS SEGMENTS | |
The Company operates principally in three industry segments, the testing service industry (that performs structural and electronic tests of semiconductor devices), the designing and manufacturing of equipment (that tests the structural integrity of integrated circuits and other products), and the distribution of various products from other manufacturers in Singapore and Southeast Asia. The following net sales were based on customer location rather than subsidiary location. | ||
The allocation of the cost of equipment, the current year investment in new equipment and depreciation expense have been made on the basis of the primary purpose for which the equipment was acquired. | ||
All inter-segment sales are sales from the manufacturing segment to the testing and distribution segment. Total inter-segment sales were $294 in fiscal 2005, $151 in fiscal 2004, and $41 in fiscal 2003. Corporate assets mainly consist of cash and prepaid expenses. Corporate expenses mainly consist of salaries, insurance, professional expenses and directors fees. |
Business Segment Information:
Year | Operating | Depr. | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Ended | Net | Income | Total | and | Capital | |||||||||||||||||||
Jun. 30 | Sales | (loss) | Assets | Amort. | Expenditures | |||||||||||||||||||
Manufacturing |
FY 2005 | $ | 10,681 | $ | (109 | ) | $ | 1,907 | $ | 67 | $ | 83 | ||||||||||||
FY 2004 | $ | 7,122 | $ | (205 | ) | $ | 2,423 | $ | 99 | $ | 165 | |||||||||||||
FY 2003 | $ | 4,674 | $ | (802 | ) | $ | 2,494 | $ | 88 | $ | 5 | |||||||||||||
Testing Services |
FY 2005 | $ | 11,940 | $ | 470 | $ | 14,417 | $ | 1,310 | $ | 3,132 | |||||||||||||
FY 2004 | $ | 8,908 | $ | 241 | $ | 14,893 | $ | 910 | $ | 693 | ||||||||||||||
FY 2003 | $ | 9,505 | $ | 803 | $ | 13,431 | $ | 1,068 | $ | 1,333 | ||||||||||||||
Distribution |
FY 2005 | $ | 3,073 | $ | (142 | ) | $ | 1,843 | $ | 143 | $ | 241 | ||||||||||||
FY 2004 | $ | 3,124 | $ | (27 | ) | $ | 588 | $ | 129 | $ | 227 | |||||||||||||
FY 2003 | $ | 7,067 | $ | (212 | ) | $ | 415 | $ | 109 | $ | 45 | |||||||||||||
Corporate
and Unallocated |
FY 2005 | $ | | $ | 27 | $ | 178 | $ | 1 | $ | | |||||||||||||
FY 2004 | $ | | $ | 27 | $ | 96 | $ | 7 | $ | | ||||||||||||||
FY 2003 | $ | | $ | (76 | ) | $ | 371 | $ | 6 | $ | | |||||||||||||
Total Company |
FY 2005 | $ | 25,694 | $ | 246 | $ | 18,345 | $ | 1,521 | $ | 3,456 | |||||||||||||
FY 2004 | $ | 19,154 | $ | 36 | $ | 18,000 | $ | 1,145 | $ | 1,085 | ||||||||||||||
FY 2003 | $ | 21,246 | $ | (287 | ) | $ | 16,711 | $ | 1,271 | $ | 1,383 |
-67-
Table of Contents
Geographic Area Information:
Elimin- | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Year | ations | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ended | United | and | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Jun. 30, | States | Europe | Singapore | Thailand | Malaysia | Other | Company | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net sales to |
FY 2005 | $ | 2,209 | 2,684 | 12,620 | 2,135 | 6,340 | (294 | ) | 25,694 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
customers |
FY 2004 | $ | 4,706 | 1,255 | 9,944 | 2,534 | 866 | (151 | ) | 19,154 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
FY 2003 | $ | 9,038 | 943 | 8,682 | 1,992 | 632 | (41 | ) | 21,246 | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Operating |
FY 2005 | $ | (192 | ) | (38 | ) | 268 | 46 | 135 | 27 | 246 | |||||||||||||||||||||
Income (loss) |
FY 2004 | $ | (216 | ) | (23 | ) | 184 | 48 | 16 | 27 | 36 | |||||||||||||||||||||
FY 2003 | $ | (167 | ) | (140 | ) | 73 | 17 | 6 | (76 | ) | (287 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||
Long-lived |
FY 2005 | $ | 17 | 305 | 3,518 | 882 | 2,880 | (40 | ) | 7,562 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Assets |
FY 2004 | $ | 8 | 380 | 3,557 | 886 | 411 | (40 | ) | 5,202 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
FY 2003 | $ | 104 | 446 | 3,514 | 844 | 342 | (40 | ) | 5,210 |
17. | QUARTERLY FINANCIAL DATA (UNAUDITED) | |
The Companys summarized quarterly financial data are as follows: |
Year ended June 30, 2004 | Sep. 30, | Dec. 31, | Mar. 31, | Jun. 30, | ||||||||||||
Revenues |
$ | 3,850 | $ | 5,056 | $ | 5,042 | $ | 5,206 | ||||||||
Expenses |
4,046 | 4,816 | 4,869 | (a) | 5,135 | (b) | ||||||||||
(Loss) income before income taxes and minority interest |
(196 | ) | 240 | 173 | 71 | |||||||||||
Income taxes |
15 | 18 | 7 | (27 | ) | |||||||||||
(Loss) income before minority interest |
(211 | ) | 222 | 166 | 98 | |||||||||||
Minority interest |
(54 | ) | (4 | ) | 2 | 1 | ||||||||||
Net (loss) income |
$ | (265 | ) | $ | 218 | $ | 168 | $ | 99 | |||||||
Net (loss) income per share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | (0.09 | ) | $ | 0.07 | $ | 0.06 | $ | 0.03 | |||||||
Fully diluted |
$ | (0.09 | ) | $ | 0.07 | $ | 0.06 | $ | 0.03 |
Year ended June 30, 2005 | Sep. 30, | Dec. 31, | Mar. 31, | Jun. 30, | ||||||||||||
Revenues |
$ | 7,851 | $ | 5,682 | $ | 6,117 | $ | 6,044 | ||||||||
Expenses |
7,490 | 5,876 | 6,117 | 5,818 | (e) | |||||||||||
Income (loss) before income taxes and minority interest |
361 | (194 | ) | | 226 | |||||||||||
Income taxes |
111 | (60 | )(c) | (26 | )(d) | 145 | ||||||||||
Income (loss) before minority interest |
250 | (134 | ) | 26 | 81 | |||||||||||
Minority interest |
(13 | ) | 34 | (4 | ) | (19 | ) | |||||||||
Net income (loss) |
$ | 237 | $ | (100 | ) | $ | 22 | $ | 62 | |||||||
Net income (loss) per share: |
||||||||||||||||
Basic |
$ | 0.08 | $ | (0.03 | ) | $ | 0.01 | $ | 0.01 | |||||||
Fully diluted |
$ | 0.08 | $ | (0.03 | ) | $ | 0.01 | $ | 0.01 |
-68-
Table of Contents
(a) | This includes a gain on disposal of equipment of $62 derived from Ireland operation. | |
(b) | The expenses include a gain on disposal of boards of $39 derived from the Thailand operation. | |
(c) | This includes a tax refund of $68 in the Singapore operations after the assessment of the past years taxes were finalized. | |
(d) | This includes a tax refundable of $46 in the Malaysia operation after the assessment of the past years taxes were finalized. | |
(e) | The expenses include write off of machinery and equipment, furniture and fittings, and leasehold improvement of $70 from the Singapore testing operation. |
18. | SUBSEQUENT EVENTS | |
Trio Tech International Pte. LTD., a Singapore company and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Registrant (the Company), executed a Letter of Offer on June 3, 2005 to Globetronics Technology BHD., a Malaysian company (Seller), to acquire Sellers China subsidiary dealing with the testing of semiconductor components. The Company has agreed that, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions (including without limitation satisfactory results from the Buyers due diligence examination and the execution of a definitive Sales and Purchase Agreement), it or one of its subsidiaries and/or nominees of which the Company owns 100% of the outstanding equity interests (Buyer), would acquire 100% of the issued share capital of Globetronics (Shanghai) Inc., a wholly-owned China subsidiary of Seller, for an aggregate cash purchase price of $153. The purchase price shall include all assets of Globetronics (Shanghai) Inc., excluding the accounts receivables and other receivables. These assets are expected to be utilized in the acquired burn-in testing division of Buyer to service the existing customers of the Seller. The Seller shall be responsible for settling all current and long term liabilities incurred prior to the closing of the transaction. The source of the funds for this acquisition will be from general working capital of Buyer. | ||
The Board of Directors approved Managements recommendation at a meeting held on May 2, 2005 to close the Companys Ireland operation, which operates the testing facility in Dublin because the Ireland operation generated cash flow only from renting out the property located in Dublin and had not generated cash flow from testing services for the past three years. The customers and employees of the Ireland operation were informed of the closure subsequent to the end of fiscal 2005. In August 2005, the Company established a restructuring plan and estimated that the reasonable costs for completing the closure of the operation in Dublin would be approximately $450. Of this total, $350 would be related to one-time severance-related expenses, and the remaining approximately $100 would be related to facilities-related expenses. | ||
The Company plans to sell the property in Ireland at a later date but has not yet entered into any agreements with respect thereto. The Company is unable to provide better estimate regarding the planned sales transaction and any additional costs and charges, all of which could have varied widely depending on the terms of any specific purchase and sale agreements. |
-69-