UNITED
STATES SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
FORM
10-Q
(Mark
One)
[X] |
|
QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934 |
For the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2005.
OR
[ ] |
|
TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934 |
For the
transition period from to
.
Commission
File Number: 0-30757
Sunrise
Telecom Incorporated
(Exact
name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
Delaware |
|
77-0291197 |
(State
or other jurisdiction of
incorporation
or organization) |
|
(IRS
Employer
Identification
No.) |
302
Enzo Drive, San Jose, California 95138
(Address
of principal executive offices, including zip code)
Registrant's
telephone number, including area code: (408) 363-8000
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 [X] No [ ]
Indicate
by check mark whether the Registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act.)
Yes [ ] No [X]
As of May
8, 2005, there were 50,843,794 shares of the Registrant's Common Stock
outstanding, par value $0.001.
SUNRISE
TELECOM INCORPORATED AND SUBSIDIARIES
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
PART
I. |
Financial
Information |
Page
Number |
|
|
|
Item
1. |
Financial
Statements (unaudited) |
3 |
|
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004
|
3 |
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Three-Month Periods Ended
March 31, 2005 and 2004 |
4 |
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Three-Month Periods Ended
March 31, 2005 and 2004 |
5 |
|
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements |
6 |
Item
2. |
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
|
16 |
Item
3. |
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk |
34 |
Item
4. |
Controls
and Procedures |
35 |
|
|
|
PART
II. |
Other
Information |
|
|
|
|
Item
1. |
Legal
Proceedings |
36 |
Item
2. |
Unregistered
Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds |
37 |
Item
3. |
Defaults
Upon Senior Securities |
37 |
Item
4. |
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders |
37 |
Item
5. |
Other
Information |
37 |
Item
6. |
Exhibits
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
Signatures
|
38 |
|
Exhibit
Index |
39 |
|
PART
I FINANCIAL
INFORMATION |
ITEM
1. |
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (unaudited) |
SUNRISE
TELECOM INCORPORATED AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In
thousands, except share data, unaudited)
|
March
31, 2005 |
|
December
31, 2004 |
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents |
$ |
15,355 |
|
|
$ |
17,758 |
|
Short-term
investments |
|
16,508 |
|
|
|
16,113 |
|
Accounts
receivable, net of allowance of $493 and $799, respectively |
|
10,301 |
|
|
|
15,111 |
|
Inventories
|
|
13,247 |
|
|
|
13,265 |
|
Prepaid
expenses and other assets |
|
1,387 |
|
|
|
1,305 |
|
Deferred
tax assets |
|
309 |
|
|
|
303 |
|
Total
current assets |
|
57,107 |
|
|
|
63,855 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and equipment, net |
|
27,253 |
|
|
|
27,176 |
|
Restricted
cash |
|
11 |
|
|
|
305 |
|
Marketable
securities |
|
1,540 |
|
|
|
1,433 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
12,633 |
|
|
|
12,729 |
|
Intangible
assets, net |
|
2,724 |
|
|
|
3,249 |
|
Deferred
tax assets |
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Other
assets |
|
733 |
|
|
|
738 |
|
Total
assets |
$ |
102,008 |
|
|
$ |
109,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term
borrowings and current portion of notes payable |
$ |
213 |
|
|
$ |
223 |
|
Accounts
payable |
|
1,595 |
|
|
|
2,190 |
|
Other
accrued expenses |
|
8,443 |
|
|
|
7,748 |
|
Product
warranties liability |
|
810 |
|
|
|
1,040 |
|
Income
taxes payable |
|
1,669 |
|
|
|
1,496 |
|
Deferred
tax liabilities |
|
132 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
Deferred
revenue |
|
303 |
|
|
|
459 |
|
Total
current liabilities |
|
13,165 |
|
|
|
13,289 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
payable, less current portion |
|
765 |
|
|
|
882 |
|
Deferred
revenue |
|
65 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
Other
liabilities |
|
— |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’
equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
stock, $0.001 par value per share; 175,000,000 shares authorized;
52,585,273 and 52,454,531 shares issued as of March 31, 2005 and December
31, 2004, respectively; 50,883,394 and 50,702,652 shares outstanding as of
March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively |
|
51 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital |
|
70,205 |
|
|
|
69,993 |
|
Retained
earnings |
|
15,763 |
|
|
|
23,092 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income |
|
1,994 |
|
|
|
2,054 |
|
Total
stockholders’ equity |
|
88,013 |
|
|
|
95,190 |
|
Total
liabilities and stockholders’ equity |
$ |
102,008 |
|
|
$ |
109,492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
SUNRISE
TELECOM INCORPORATED AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In
thousands, except per share data, unaudited)
|
Three
Months Ended March 31, |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales |
$ |
11,718 |
|
|
$ |
13,801 |
|
Cost
of sales |
|
4,039 |
|
|
|
3,935 |
|
Gross
profit |
|
7,679 |
|
|
|
9,866 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development |
|
4,570 |
|
|
|
3,912 |
|
Selling
and marketing |
|
4,851 |
|
|
|
3,963 |
|
General
and administrative |
|
3,154 |
|
|
|
1,811 |
|
Total
operating expenses |
|
12,575 |
|
|
|
9,686 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from operations |
|
(4,896 |
) |
|
|
180 |
|
Other
income, net |
|
212 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) before income taxes |
|
(4,684 |
) |
|
|
233 |
|
Income
tax expense |
|
106 |
|
|
|
7,519 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
loss |
$ |
(4,790 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,286 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
and diluted |
$ |
(0.09 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.15 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
used in per share computation: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
and diluted |
|
50,758 |
|
|
|
50,164 |
|
See
accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
SUNRISE
TELECOM INCORPORATED AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In
thousands, unaudited)
|
Three
Months Ended March 31, |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
Cash
flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
received from customers |
$ |
16,702 |
|
|
$ |
18,474 |
|
Cash
paid to suppliers and employees |
|
(15,863 |
) |
|
|
(15,134 |
) |
Income
taxes refunded (paid) |
|
(71 |
) |
|
|
259 |
|
Interest
and other receipts, net |
|
223 |
|
|
|
153 |
|
Net
cash provided by operating activities |
|
991 |
|
|
|
3,752 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
of short-term investments, net |
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
4,000 |
|
Purchases
of short-term investments, net |
|
(2,395 |
) |
|
|
(8,997 |
) |
Capital
expenditures |
|
(732 |
) |
|
|
(355 |
) |
Net
cash used in investing activities |
|
(1,127 |
) |
|
|
(5,352 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase
(decrease) in restricted cash |
|
294 |
|
|
|
(200 |
) |
Payments
on notes payable |
|
(67 |
) |
|
|
(75 |
) |
Dividends
paid |
|
(2,539 |
) |
|
|
(2,507 |
) |
Proceeds
from exercise of stock options |
|
212 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
Net
cash used in financing activities |
|
(2,100 |
) |
|
|
(2,657 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect
of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |
|
(167 |
) |
|
|
128 |
|
Net
decrease in cash and cash equivalents |
|
(2,403 |
) |
|
|
(4,129 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period |
|
17,758 |
|
|
|
23,079 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at the end of the period |
$ |
15,355 |
|
|
$ |
18,950 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental
Disclosures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
paid for interest |
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
Cash
paid for (refunded from) income taxes |
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
(259 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See
accompanying notes to condensed consolidated financial statements.
SUNRISE
TELECOM INCORPORATED AND SUBSIDIARIES
Notes
to Consolidated Financial Statements
(1) Business
and Certain Significant Accounting Policies
(a) Business
Sunrise
Telecom Incorporated (the “Company”) was incorporated as Sunrise Telecom, Inc.
in California in October 1991. In July 2000, the Company reincorporated in
Delaware and changed its name to Sunrise Telecom Incorporated. The Company
develops, manufactures, and markets service verification equipment that enables
service providers to pre-qualify facilities for services, verify newly installed
services, and diagnose problems relating to telecommunications, cable broadband,
and Internet networks. The Company sells its products on six continents through
a worldwide network of manufacturers, sales representatives, distributors, and
direct sales people. The Company has wholly-owned subsidiaries in Montreal,
Canada; Norcross, Georgia; Modena, Italy; Taipei, Taiwan; Geneva, Switzerland;
Seoul, Korea; Tokyo, Japan; Paris France; Mexico City, Mexico; and Stuttgart,
Germany. It also has representative liaison offices in Beijing, Xian, Guangzhou,
ShenZhen and Hong Kong, China and a foreign sales corporation in Barbados.
These
condensed consolidated financial statements, including the notes to the
condensed consolidated financial statements included herein, have been prepared
by the Company, without audit, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the
Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"). Accordingly, they do not include all
of the information and footnotes required by accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America for complete financial statements. In
the opinion of management, these financial statements include all adjustments,
which are only normal recurring adjustments, necessary for their fair
presentation. These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the
Company's audited financial statements and notes thereto included in the
Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 filed
with the SEC. Certain amounts in the prior period's condensed consolidated
financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the current year's
presentation.
The
interim results presented are not necessarily indicative of results that may be
expected for any subsequent interim period or for the full year.
(b) Net
Loss per Share
Basic
earnings (loss) per share (“EPS”) is computed using the weighted-average number
of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS is computed using
the weighted-average number of common and dilutive potential common equivalent
shares outstanding during the period. Potential common equivalent shares consist
of common stock issuable upon exercise of stock options using the treasury stock
method. For the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, certain potential
common equivalent shares were excluded from the calculation of diluted EPS
presented in the consolidated statement of operations because their effect would
have been anti-dilutive.
Specifically,
diluted EPS does not include the effect of 4,517,831 and 4,603,570 anti-dilutive
potential common shares for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004,
respectively.
The
following is a reconciliation of the shares used in the computation of basic and
diluted EPS (in thousands):
|
|
Three
Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Basic
EPS—weighted-average number of common shares outstanding |
|
|
50,758 |
|
|
50,164 |
|
Effect
of dilutive common equivalent shares: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
options outstanding |
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Diluted
EPS—weighted-average number of common shares and common equivalent shares
outstanding |
|
|
50,758 |
|
|
50,164 |
|
(c) Stock-Based
Compensation
The
Company accounts for employee stock-based compensation using the intrinsic-value
method, in accordance with Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25 (“APB No.
25”), Accounting for Stock-Issued to Employees. Accordingly, deferred
compensation cost is recorded on the date of grant to the extent that the fair
value of the underlying share of common stock exceeds the exercise price for a
stock option or the purchase price for a share of common stock. During 1999, the
Company recorded deferred stock-based compensation cost for stock options issued
to employees at exercise prices that were subsequently determined to have been
below the fair value of the stock on the date of grant. In addition, the Company
recorded deferred stock-based compensation cost for stock options granted to
employees of Pro.Tel in the first quarter of 2000. The deferred compensation
cost associated with both of these stock option grants has been amortized as a
charge against operating results on a straight-line basis over the four year
vesting period of the options. The Company has allocated the amortization
expense for deferred stock-based compensation to the departments in which the
related employees’ services are charged.
If
compensation expense for the Company’s stock-based compensation plans had been
determined in a manner consistent with the fair value approach described in SFAS
No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, as amended by SFAS No. 148
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation—Transition and Disclosure—an Amendment
of FASB Statement No. 123, the Company’s net loss and loss per share, as
reported, would have been reduced to the pro forma amounts indicated below (in
thousands, except per share data):
|
|
Three
Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Net
loss, as reported |
|
|
(4,790 |
) |
|
(7,286 |
) |
Add:
Stock-based employee compensation expense included in reported net loss,
net of related tax effects |
|
|
— |
|
|
266 |
|
Deduct:
Total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under fair
value based method for all awards, net of related tax
effects |
|
|
(394 |
) |
|
(797 |
) |
Pro
forma net loss |
|
|
(5,184 |
) |
|
(7,817 |
) |
Loss
per share, as reported: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
and diluted |
|
|
(0.09 |
) |
|
(0.15 |
) |
Loss
per share, pro forma: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
and diluted |
|
|
(0.10 |
) |
|
(0.16 |
) |
For the
purposes of computing pro forma net loss, the fair value of each option grant is
estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The
assumptions used to value the option grant are as follows:
|
|
Three
Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
Dividend
yield |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
1.3 |
% |
Expected
term |
|
|
5
years |
|
|
5
years |
|
Risk-free
interest rate |
|
|
4.17 |
% |
|
2.91 |
% |
Volatility
rate |
|
|
0.6485 |
|
|
0.7053 |
|
(d) Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
On April
14, 2005, the SEC announced the adoption of a new rule that amends the
compliance dates for the revised SFAS No. 123 Share-Based
Payment (“SFAS
123R”). The Commission’s new rule allows companies to implement SFAS 123R at the
beginning of their next fiscal year, instead of the next reporting period that
begins after June 15, 2005 (January 1, 2006 for the Company). In December 2004,
the FASB issued the revised SFAS No. 123, which addresses the accounting for
share-based payment transactions in which the Company obtains employee services
in exchange for (a) equity instruments of the Company or (b) liabilities that
are based on the fair value of the Company’s equity instruments or that may be
settled by the issuance of such equity instruments. This statement eliminates
the ability to account for employee share-based payment transactions using APB
No. 25 and requires instead that such transactions be accounted for using the
grant-date fair value based method. The Company anticipates that the adoption of
SFAS 123R will have an adverse material impact on the Company’s financial
position and results of operations, but has not determined the effect the
adoption of SFAS No. 123R.
(e) Reclassifications
Certain
amounts in the prior years’ consolidated financial statements have been
reclassified to conform to the current year’s presentation.
(2) Inventories
Inventories
Inventories
consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
Raw
materials |
|
$ |
5,253 |
|
$ |
4,965 |
|
Work
in process |
|
|
4,929 |
|
|
4,067 |
|
Finished
goods |
|
|
3,065 |
|
|
4,233 |
|
|
|
$ |
13,247 |
|
$ |
13,265 |
|
(3) Comprehensive
Loss
Comprehensive
loss comprises net loss and other comprehensive income (loss). Other
comprehensive income (loss) includes certain changes in the equity of the
Company that are excluded from net loss. The components of the Company's
comprehensive loss, net of tax, were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Three
Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Net
loss |
|
$ |
(4,790 |
) |
$ |
(7,286 |
) |
Change
in unrealized gain on available-for sale investments, net of any tax
effect |
|
|
107 |
|
|
406 |
|
Change
in foreign currency translation adjustments |
|
|
(167 |
) |
|
105 |
|
Total
comprehensive loss |
|
$ |
(4,850 |
) |
$ |
(6,775 |
) |
(4) Marketable
Securities
The
Company determines the appropriate classification of debt and equity securities
under SFAS No. 115, Accounting
for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Instruments”, at the
time of purchase and reevaluates this designation at each balance sheet date.
Investments classified as available for sale are reported at fair market value,
with unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, reported as a separate component
of other comprehensive income (loss) in stockholders’ equity. Realized gains and
losses on sales of investments and declines in value determined to be other than
temporary are included in Other income, net in the consolidated statements of
operations. Investment securities available for current operations are
classified as current assets, and all other investment securities are classified
as non-current assets.
Marketable
securities at March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004 consisted of common stock of
Top Union Electronics Corp. (“Top Union”), a Taiwan R.O.C. corporation. The
Company has classified this investment as an available-for-sale security, which
is stated at fair value with the unrealized gain presented as a separate
component of stockholders’ equity. At March 31, 2005, the Company held 2,957,480
shares of Top Union stock. The Company made no sales of Top Union stock during
the three month periods ending March 31, 2005 and 2004.
As of
March 31, 2005, the Company revalued its Top Union shares to their fair value of
$1,540,000. This resulted in an additional unrealized gain of $107,000 for the
three-month period then ended, which the Company recorded as other comprehensive
income. At December 31, 2004, the cumulative unrealized gain on this investment
was $774,000.
(5) Goodwill
and Other Intangible Assets
On
January 1, 2002, the Company adopted SFAS No. 142, Goodwill
and Other Intangible Assets. In
accordance with SFAS No. 142, the Company no longer amortizes goodwill from
business acquisitions.
Acquired
intangible assets consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
As
of March 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
Gross
Carrying
Amount |
|
Accumulated
Amortization |
|
Net Carrying
Amount |
|
Amortized
intangible assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Developed
technology |
|
$ |
11,245 |
|
$ |
(9,436 |
) |
$ |
1,809 |
|
Non-compete |
|
|
783 |
|
|
(659 |
) |
|
124 |
|
License |
|
|
637 |
|
|
(459 |
) |
|
178 |
|
Patents |
|
|
152 |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
113 |
|
Other |
|
|
95 |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
64 |
|
|
|
$ |
12,912 |
|
$ |
(10,624 |
) |
|
2,288 |
|
Unamortized
intangible assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patents
pending |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
369 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67 |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
436 |
|
Intangible
assets, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,724 |
|
|
|
As
of December 31, 2004 |
|
|
|
Gross
Carrying
Amount |
|
Accumulated
Amortization |
|
Net Carrying
Amount |
|
Amortized
intangible assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Developed
technology |
|
$ |
11,253 |
|
$ |
(8,949 |
) |
$ |
2,304 |
|
Non-compete |
|
|
797 |
|
|
(629 |
) |
|
168 |
|
License |
|
|
637 |
|
|
(446 |
) |
|
191 |
|
Patents |
|
|
152 |
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
116 |
|
Other |
|
|
95 |
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
66 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
$ |
|
) |
|
|
|
Unamortized
intangible assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patents
pending |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
345 |
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59 |
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
404 |
|
Intangible
assets, net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,249 |
|
The
Company amortizes intangible assets on a straight-line basis over their
estimated useful lives of up to ten years. Aggregate amortization expense for
the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004 was $586,000, and $738,000
respectively. Amortization
expense is classified as a general and administrative expense on the Company's
condensed consolidated statement of operations.
Estimated
future aggregate annual amortization expense for intangible assets is as follows
(in thousands):
Nine
months ending December 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
1,118 |
|
Year
ending December 31, |
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
719 |
|
2007 |
|
|
179 |
|
2008 |
|
|
58 |
|
2009 |
|
|
58 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
$ |
2,258 |
|
The
changes in the carrying amount of goodwill during the three months ending March
31, 2005 (in thousands):
Balance
as of December 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
12,729 |
|
Effect
of foreign currency translation |
|
|
(96 |
) |
Balance
as of March 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
12,633 |
|
The
Company will perform its next annual impairment test of goodwill, as required by
SFAS No. 142, Goodwill
and Other Intangible Assets, during
the quarter ending
December 31, 2005, unless a triggering event occurs before that
date.
(6) Liability
for Product Warranties
Changes
in the Company’s liability for product warranties during the three month periods
ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Balance at
Beginning
of
Period |
|
Warranties
Accrued |
|
Warranties
Paid |
|
Balance at
End
of
Period |
|
Three
months ending March 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
811 |
|
$ |
109 |
|
$ |
(110 |
) |
$ |
810 |
|
Three
months ending March 31, 2004 |
|
$ |
1,038 |
|
$ |
130 |
|
$ |
(128 |
) |
$ |
1,040 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7) Other
Assets
Other
assets consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
March
31, |
|
December
31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Insurance
deposits |
|
$ |
312 |
|
$ |
325 |
|
Other
deposits |
|
|
421 |
|
|
413 |
|
|
|
$ |
733 |
|
$ |
738 |
|
(8) Short-term
Borrowings and Notes Payable
As a
result of various acquisitions completed during prior years, the Company had
three non-interest bearing notes payable at March 31, 2005. The aggregate
outstanding balance on these notes was $79,000. In addition, in 2001, the
Company obtained a loan from the Italian government, which bears interest at 2%
a year. At March 31, 2005, the outstanding balance on this loan was $863,000,
which is to be repaid by semi-annual principal payments over an eight-year
period which began in July 2003. The Company also has three short-term notes and
other borrowings, with an aggregate amount due of $36,000 as of March 31, 2005.
Annual
amounts to be repaid under all of these notes are as follows (in thousands):
Nine
months ending December 31, 2005 |
|
$ |
129 |
|
Year
ending December 31, |
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
188 |
|
2007 |
|
|
145 |
|
2008 |
|
|
144 |
|
2009 |
|
|
146 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
$ |
978 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9) Income
Taxes
During
the three month period ending March 31, 2005, the Company recorded income
tax expense of 106,000 for those jurisdictions where a profit is projected
for the 2005 fiscal year. During 2004, the Company recorded a valuation
allowance against all of the Company’s net deferred tax assets in most
jurisdictions in the amount of $7,429,000. The expense for recording the
valuation allowance is a non-cash item, and the recording of this expense does
not imply that the Company owes additional income taxes.
The
Company determines the need for a valuation allowance on deferred tax assets in
accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 109, Accounting
for Income Taxes, which
requires that the Company weigh both positive and negative evidence in order to
ascertain whether it is more likely than not that deferred tax assets will be
realized. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax
consequences attributable to temporary differences between the financial
statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their
respective tax bases and for the future tax consequences attributable to
operating losses and tax credit carryforwards. The ultimate realization of
deferred tax assets is dependent on the generation of future taxable income
during the periods in which the related temporary differences become deductible.
The Company evaluated all significant available positive and negative evidence,
including the existence of cumulative net losses in recent periods, benefits
that could be realized from available tax strategies, and forecasts of future
taxable income, in determining the need for a valuation allowance on its
deferred tax assets. At March 31, 2005, the Company reported a pre-tax loss of
$4,684,000, that, combined with cumulative net losses in recent periods,
represented sufficient negative evidence that was difficult for positive
evidence to overcome under the evaluation guidance of SFAS No. 109. Accordingly,
the Company intends to maintain a valuation allowance against all of the
Company’s deferred tax assets in most jurisdictions until sufficient positive
evidence, such as the resumption of a consistent earnings pattern, exists to
support its reversal in accordance with SFAS No. 109.
(10) Segment
Information
SFAS No.
131, Disclosure
About Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information,
establishes standards for the manner in which public companies report
information about operating segments, products, services, geographic areas, and
major customers in annual and interim financial statements. The method of
determining what information to report is based on the way that management
organizes the operating segments within the enterprise for making operating
decisions and assessing financial performance.
The
Company considers its Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) to be its chief operating
decision-maker. The CEO reviews financial information presented on a
consolidated basis accompanied by disaggregated information about revenue by
geographic region for purposes of making operating decisions and assessing
financial performance. The consolidated financial information reviewed by the
CEO is the same as the information presented in the accompanying consolidated
statements of operations. In addition, as the Company’s assets are primarily
located in its corporate offices in the United States and not allocated to any
specific segment, the Company does not produce reports for, or measure the
performance of, its segments based on any asset-based metrics. Therefore, the
Company operates in a single operating segment, which comprises the design,
manufacture, and sale of equipment for testing wireline access, cable broadband,
fibre optics and signaling.
Revenue
information regarding operations in the different geographic regions is as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
Three
Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Net
sales: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North
America (United States and Canada) |
|
$ |
5,257 |
|
$ |
7,555 |
|
Asia/Pacific |
|
|
3,004 |
|
|
3,205 |
|
Europe/Africa/Middle
East |
|
|
2,873 |
|
|
2,907 |
|
Latin
America |
|
|
584 |
|
|
134 |
|
|
|
$ |
11,718 |
|
$ |
13,801 |
|
Long-lived
assets, which consist of property and equipment, were located in the following
geographic regions (in thousands):
|
|
March
31, |
|
December
31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
United
States |
|
$ |
22,938 |
|
$ |
22,906 |
|
Canada |
|
|
1,914 |
|
|
1,852 |
|
Taiwan
and other Asia/Pacific |
|
|
1,581 |
|
|
1,571 |
|
Europe/Africa/Middle
East |
|
|
820 |
|
|
847 |
|
|
|
$ |
27,253 |
|
$ |
27,176 |
|
Revenue
information by product category is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
Three
Months Ended
March
31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Net
sales: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Wireline
access |
|
$ |
4,790 |
|
$ |
7,114 |
|
Cable
broadband |
|
|
3,930 |
|
|
3,540 |
|
Fiber
optics |
|
|
2,366 |
|
|
2,183 |
|
Signaling |
|
|
632 |
|
|
964 |
|
|
|
$ |
11,718 |
|
$ |
13,801 |
|
No single
customer accounted for 10% or more of the Company’s total sales during the three
months ended March 31, 2005. Sales to one customer, SBC Communications Inc.,
were $1,863,000, or 13% of the Company’s total sales, during the three months
ended March 31, 2004.
(11) Statement
of Cash Flows
The
Company presents its condensed consolidated statements of cash flows using the
direct method. Following is a reconciliation of net loss to net cash provided by
operating activities (in thousands):
|
|
Three
Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Net
loss |
|
$ |
(4,790 |
) |
$ |
(7,286 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments
to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating
activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization |
|
|
1,742 |
|
|
1,801 |
|
Amortization
of deferred stock-based compensation |
|
|
— |
|
|
266 |
|
Recoveries
of losses on accounts receivable |
|
|
(174 |
) |
|
(344 |
) |
Loss
on disposal of property and equipment |
|
|
6 |
|
|
93 |
|
Deferred
income taxes |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
7,320 |
|
Accounts
receivable |
|
|
4,984 |
|
|
4,673 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
(491 |
) |
|
(1,407 |
) |
Prepaid
expenses and other assets |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
(279 |
) |
Accounts
payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
8 |
|
|
(1,236 |
) |
Income
taxes payable |
|
|
42 |
|
|
458 |
|
Deferred
revenue |
|
|
(220 |
) |
|
(307 |
) |
Total
adjustments |
|
|
5,781 |
|
|
11,038 |
|
Net
cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
991 |
|
$ |
3,752 |
|
(12) Legal
Proceedings
On March
31, 2004, Acterna, LLC (“Acterna”) filed a lawsuit against the Company and
Consultronics, Ltd. and Consultronics, Inc. (the latter two, collectively,
“Consultronics”) in the United States District Court for the District of
Maryland. Acterna alleged that the Company’s SunSet xDSL and SunSet MTT products
infringe its United States Patent Nos. 6,064,721 (the “‘721 patent”), 6,385,300
(the “‘300 patent”), and 6,590,963 (the “‘963 patent”) and that the Company’s
STT product infringes its United States Patent No. 5,511,108 (the “‘108
patent”). Acterna also alleged that the Consultronics CoLT 450 product infringes
its ‘721 patent. Acterna seeks injunctive relief, unspecified damages, and
attorneys’ fees and costs.
On April
23, 2004, the Company filed a lawsuit against Acterna in the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit alleged that
Acterna’s ANT-5 SDH Access Tester and ANT-20 Advanced Network Tester infringe
the Company’s United States Patent No. 5,619,489 (the “‘489 patent”). The
Company seeks injunctive relief, unspecified damages, and attorneys’ fees and
costs.
On
September 7, 2004, Acterna filed an answer in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California, seeking declaratory judgment that its
ANT-5 SDH Access Tester and ANT-20 Advanced Network Tester do not infringe the
‘489 patent, that the ‘489 patent is invalid, and that the ‘489 patent is
unenforceable. At the same time, Acterna also filed a counterclaim against the
Company, alleging that certain products, namely the CM 1000, CM 500, CM 250,
N1776A, AT 2000 and AT 2500, all of which are manufactured and sold by the
Company’s subsidiaries, infringe its United States Patent No. 5,751,766 (the
“‘766 patent”). Acterna seeks injunctive relief, unspecified damages and
attorneys fees and costs.
The
Company believes that the lawsuits against it are without merit, and intends to
defend itself vigorously against the allegations that Acterna is making against
it. Specifically, the Company is defending itself against Acterna’s allegations
by seeking declaratory judgment that it’s products do not infringe the ‘721
patent, the ‘300 patent, the ‘963 patent, the ‘108 patent, or the ‘766 patent;
that the ‘721 patent, the ‘300 patent, the ‘963 patent, the ‘108 patent, and the
‘766 patent are invalid; and that the ‘721 patent, the ‘300 patent, the ‘963
patent, the ‘108 patent, and the ‘766 patent are unenforceable. In addition, the
Company is seeking declaratory judgment that it’s products do not infringe a
sixth, recently issued Acterna patent, United States Patent No. 6,738,454 (the
“‘454 patent”). The ‘454 patent is a continuation patent issued May 18, 2004
related to the ‘721 patent, the ‘300 patent, and the ‘963 patent. The Company is
also seeking declaratory judgment that the ‘454 patent is invalid and
unenforceable.
In
October 2004, the Company learned that Acterna and Consultronics had reached a
settlement with respect to Acterna’s claim against Consultronics and that the
matter with respect to Consultronics had been dismissed with
prejudice.
On
January 5, 2005, Acterna asserted in the Maryland case that the Company’s
products also infringe its ‘454 patent.
On March
18, 2005, the Company received a letter from Acterna asserting that the CaLan
3010, a product manufactured by one of the Company’s subsidiaries, may infringe
two additional Acterna patents, United States Patent Nos. 5,584,842 and
5,867,206 (respectively, the “‘842 patent” and the “‘206 patent”). On April 15,
2005, the Company filed a lawsuit against Acterna in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California, seeking declaratory judgment that
it does not infringe the ‘842 patent or the ‘206 patent, and that such patents
are invalid and unenforceable.
On May
10, 2005, the Company filed a lawsuit against Acterna in the United Stated
District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The lawsuit alleged that
Acterna’s HST-3000 infringes the Company’s United States Patent No. 6,891,803, a
new patent that issued to the Company earlier that same day. The Company seeks
injunctive relief, unspecified damages, attorneys’ fees and costs.
The
Company is presently unable to estimate the likely costs of the litigation
and/or any settlement of these legal proceedings with Acterna.
From time
to time, the Company may be involved in litigation or other legal proceedings,
including those noted above, relating to claims arising out of its day-to-day
operations or otherwise. Litigation is inherently uncertain, and the Company
could experience unfavorable rulings. Should the Company experience an
unfavorable ruling, there exists the possibility of a material adverse impact on
its financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or on its business
for the period in which the ruling occurs and/or future periods.
ITEM
2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL
CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
In
addition to the other information in this report, certain statements in the
following Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operation (MD&A) are forward-looking statements. Words such as
"expects", "anticipates", "estimates", "intends", "plans", "believes", "may",
"might", "will", and similar words and expressions are intended to identify
forward-looking statements. In particular, our stated expectation for the range
of our revenue for the quarter ending June 30, 2005 is a forward-looking
statement. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties
that could cause actual results to differ materially from those projected. Such
risks and uncertainties include, but are not necessarily limited to, those set
forth below under "Risk Factors Affecting Future Operating Results." The
following discussion should be read in conjunction with our condensed
consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this
report.
Overview
We
manufacture and market service verification equipment that enables service
providers to pre-qualify facilities for services, verify newly installed
services, monitor telecommunication and video distribution networks, and
diagnose problems relating to telecommunications, cable broadband, and internet
networks. Our products offer broad functionality, advanced technology, and
compact size to test broadband services. These include wireline access services
(including DSL), fiber optics, cable broadband networks, and signaling networks.
We design our products to maximize technicians’ effectiveness in the field and
to provide realistic network simulations for equipment manufacturers to test
their products. Our customers include incumbent local exchange carriers, cable
companies, competitive local exchange carriers, and other service providers,
network infrastructure suppliers, and installers throughout North America, Latin
America, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and the Asia/Pacific region.
Companies
in the telecommunications industry throughout the world have been experiencing
decreased profitability resulting from many factors. The most significant of
these factors are overbuilding of certain portions of the telecommunications
infrastructure during the late 1990s and increased overlap between the
previously separate businesses of wireless, local telephone services, and cable
TV service, which has led to increased competition. In addition, there has been
substantial consolidation within the telecommunications industry during this
time, particularly in the North American markets, which has led to delay and
reduction of orders for test equipment. We have been affected by this downturn
and consolidation, and after nine consecutive years of profitability, we were
unprofitable during each of the years ended December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004. We
are encouraged that we earned a small profit before tax in 2004 after
substantially weaker performance in 2002 and 2003. During 2005 higher operating
expenses resulting from our investments in infrastructure will challenge us to
repeat the same profitability performance.
We
compete in the challenging telecommunications equipment market by pursuing a
strategy of offering products that address the needs of diverse
telecommunications and cable service providers, and by investing in research and
development to create high-quality products that address evolving
telecommunications technologies in innovative ways.
We assess
the overall performance of our business primarily through the use of financial
metrics. Management considers several factors to be particularly important when
assessing past business success and projecting future performance. The first
such factor is the maintenance of high levels of working capital and low levels
of debt. See “Liquidity and Capital Resources.”
This
first factor is enabled by the second factor: The generation of cash flows from
our operating activities. Ultimately, the ability to consistently generate
substantial positive cash flows is the primary indicator of our business success
and is an imperative for our business’s survival. See “Liquidity and Capital
Resources.”
The third
factor is profitability. Key components of our profitability are net sales, cost
of sales, and operating expenses.
Our net
loss for the three months ended March 31, 2005, was $4.8 million compared with
$7.3 million for the comparable prior year quarter. The net loss for the first
quarter of 2004 includes a charge of $7.3 million for income tax expense related
to recording a valuation allowance against the Company's net deferred tax
assets. Manufacturing
related delays in shipping certain products adversely impacted the Company’s net
sales for the first quarter of 2005 as compared to 2004, resulting in a greater
than usual seasonal decline. This decline in net sales impacted gross margin, as
increased fixed overhead was allocated over fewer sales. In addition,
the
Company’s loss from operations during the current period was increased
substantially due to investments in the Company’s infrastructure that are
intended to facilitate and support the Company’s goal of long-term growth. These
investments include the following:
|
· |
the
growth of our direct sales channel, including the reorganization of our
North American sales organization and expansion of our international
direct sales presence, to better serve large service provider accounts
around the world; |
|
· |
the
creation of a research and development center in China to accelerate
project development and reduce overall development
cost; |
|
· |
the
expansion of our Taiwan manufacturing facility to facilitate increased
production and improve process engineering; |
|
· |
the
increase of our finance and administrative staff to support the increased
demands imposed by Sarbanes-Oxley and to support an expanding global sales
presence; and |
|
· |
larger
legal expenditures associated with patent litigation and patent
prosecution to defend the Company and enforce our intellectual property
and other legal rights. |
These
investments have been made with the general expectation that they support our
overall goal of solid growth for the current year and paving the way for
additional success in future periods.
Our net
sales for the three months ended March 31, 2005 declined from the net sales for
the same period during 2004. Our backlog at March 31, 2005, however, increased
to $7.6 million, a $2.3 million increase from backlog of $5.3 million at
December 31, 2004 and a $1.7 million increase from the backlog of $5.9 million
at March 31, 2004. Based on the March 31, 2005 backlog and second quarter order
expectations, we expect sales for the three months ending June 30, 2005 to be
between $15.0 million and $18.0 million.
Sources
of Net Sales
We
generate our cash flows primarily from selling telecommunications network
testing equipment, and our future cash flows are largely dependent on our
continuing ability to sell our products and collect cash from our customers for
those sales. We consider investments in research and development and selling and
marketing activities to be critical to our ability to generate increased sales
volume in the future, and we continually seek to offer new products to meet our
customers' needs. Notably, during the three months ended March 31, 2005, we
introduced a Voice over IP (VoIP) module on the SunSet MTT platform and
SONET/SDH modules for the MT Optical Testing Toolkit.
We sell
our products predominantly to large telecommunications service providers. These
types of customers generally commit significant resources to the evaluation of
our products and require each vendor to expend substantial time, effort, and
money educating them about the value of the proposed solutions. Delays
associated with potential customers’ internal approval and contracting
procedures, procurement practices, and testing and acceptance processes are
common and may cause potential sales to be delayed or foregone. As a result of
these and related factors, the sales cycle of new products for large customers
typically ranges from six to twenty-four months. Substantially all of our sales
are made on the basis of purchase orders rather than long-term agreements or
requirements contracts. As a result, we commit resources to the development and
production of products without having received advance or long-term purchase
commitments from our customers. We anticipate that our operating results for any
given period will continue to be dependent to a significant extent on purchase
orders, which can be delayed or cancelled by our customers.
Historically,
a significant portion of our net sales have come from a small number of
relatively large orders from a limited number of customers. No one customer
comprised more than 10% of our net sales during the three month period ending
March 31, 2005. During
the three months ended March 31, 2004, sales to one customer, SBC Communications
Inc., were $1.9 million, or 13% of our net sales. Overall,
we anticipate that our operating results for a given period will be dependent on
a small number of customers. These large customers have substantial negotiating
leverage, and the ability to obtain concessions that may negatively affect our
business and profits. We have occasionally offered terms and conditions, such as
extended payment terms, that can impact our revenue recognition, margins and
cash flow. See Risk
Factors Affecting Future Operating Results—Customer Concentration.
Currently,
competition in the telecommunications equipment market is intense and is
characterized by declining prices due to increased competition, new products and
declining customer demand. Because of these market conditions and potential
pricing pressures from large customers in the future, we expect that the average
selling price for our products will decline over time. If we fail to reduce our
production costs accordingly or fail to introduce higher margin new products,
there will be a corresponding decline in our gross margin percentage. See “Risk
Factors Affecting Future Operating Results—Competition” and “—Risks of the
Telecommunications Industry.”
We have
sales denominated in Euros, Japanese Yen and the Canadian dollar and have, in
prior years, used derivative financial instruments to hedge our foreign exchange
risks. As of March 31, 2005, we had no derivative financial instruments. To
date, foreign exchange exposure from sales has not been material to our
operations. We have also been exposed to fluctuations in non-U.S. currency
exchange rates related to our manufacturing activities in Taiwan. In the future,
we expect that a growing portion of international sales may be denominated in
currencies other than U.S. dollars, thereby exposing us to gains and losses on
non-U.S. currency transactions. See “Risk Factors Affecting Future Operating
Results—Risks of International Operations.”
Cost
of Sales
Our cost
of sales consists primarily of the following:
· Direct
material costs of product components, manuals, product documentation, and
product accessories;
· Production
wages, taxes, and benefits;
· Allocated
production overhead costs;
· Warranty
costs;
· Costs of
board level assembly by third party contract manufacturers; and
· Scrapped
and reserved material originally purchased for use in the production
process.
We
recognize direct cost of sales, wages, taxes, benefits, and allocated overhead
costs at the same time we recognize revenue for products sold. We expense
scrapped materials as incurred.
Our
industry is characterized by limited sources and long lead times for the
materials and components that we use to manufacture our products. If we
underestimate our requirements, we may have inadequate inventory, resulting in
additional product costs for expediting delivery of long lead time components.
An increase in the cost of components could result in lower margins.
Additionally, these long lead times have in the past, and may in the future,
cause us to purchase larger quantities of some parts than needed to meet firm
production requirements, increasing our investment in inventory and the risk of
the parts' obsolescence. Any subsequent write-off of inventory could result in
lower margins. See "Risk Factors Affecting Future Operating Results—Dependence
on Sole and Single Source Suppliers."
Operating
Costs
We
classify our operating expenses into three general categories: research and
development, selling and marketing, and general and administrative. Our
operating expenses include stock-based compensation expense and amortization of
certain intangible assets. We classify charges to the research and development,
selling and marketing, and general and administrative expense categories based
on the nature of the expenditures. Although each of these three categories
includes expenses that are unique to the category, each category also includes
common types of expenditures, such as salaries, amortization of stock-based
compensation, employee benefits, travel and entertainment costs, communications
costs, rent and facilities costs, and third party professional service fees. The
selling and marketing category of operating expenses also includes expenditures
specific to our sales and marketing groups, such as commissions, public
relations and advertising, trade shows, and marketing materials. The research
and development category of operating expenses also includes expenditures
specific to the research and development group, such as design and prototyping
costs. The general and administrative category of operating expenses also
includes expenditures specific to the general and administrative group, such as
legal and professional fees and amortization of identifiable intangible
assets.
We
allocate the total cost of overhead and facilities to each of the functional
areas that use overhead and facilities based upon the square footage of
facilities used or the headcount in each of these areas. These allocated charges
include facility rent, utilities, communications charges, and depreciation
expenses for our building, equipment, and office furniture.
During
the three months ended March 31, 2004, we recorded amortization of deferred
stock-based compensation expense of $0.3 million related to the grant of stock
options at exercise prices subsequently deemed to be below fair market value.
Compensation expense related to these options, which were granted in 1999 and
the first quarter of 2000, has been amortized on a straight-line basis over the
respective four-year vesting periods of the options and charged to the
departments of the employees who received these option grants. During the first
three months of 2004, we allocated amortization of deferred stock-based
compensation expense of $0.1 million to research and development expense, $0.1
million to selling and marketing expense, and $0.1 million to general and
administrative expense. At March 31, 2004, no further deferred stock-based
compensation expense remained to be amortized.
Also,
during the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, we charged $0.6 million
and $0.7 million, respectively, to general and administrative expense for
amortization of intangible assets obtained through business
acquisitions.
Litigation
On March
31, 2004, Acterna, LLC (“Acterna”) filed a lawsuit against us and Consultronics,
Ltd. and Consultronics, Inc. (the latter two, collectively, “Consultronics”) in
the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. Acterna alleged
that our SunSet xDSL and SunSet MTT products infringe its United States Patent
Nos. 6,064,721 (the “‘721 patent”), 6,385,300 (the “‘300 patent”), and 6,590,963
(the “‘963 patent”) and that our STT product infringes its United States Patent
No. 5,511,108 (the “‘108 patent”). Acterna also alleged that the Consultronics
CoLT 450 product infringes its ‘721 patent. Acterna seeks injunctive relief,
unspecified damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs.
On April
23, 2004, we filed a lawsuit against Acterna in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit alleged that Acterna’s
ANT-5 SDH Access Tester and ANT-20 Advanced Network Tester infringe our United
States Patent No. 5,619,489 (the “‘489 patent”). We are seeking injunctive
relief, unspecified damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs.
On
September 7, 2004, Acterna filed an answer in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California, seeking declaratory judgment that its
ANT-5 SDH Access Tester and ANT-20 Advanced Network Tester do not infringe the
‘489 patent, the ‘489 patent is invalid, and the ‘489 patent is unenforceable.
At the same time, Acterna also filed a counterclaim against us, alleging that
certain products, namely the CM 1000, CM 500, CM 250, N1776A, AT 2000 and AT
2500, all of which are manufactured and sold by our subsidiaries, infringe its
United States Patent No. 5,751,766 (the “‘766 patent”). Acterna seeks injunctive
relief, unspecified damages and attorneys fees and costs.
We
believe that the lawsuits against us are without merit, and we intend to defend
ourself vigorously against the allegations that Acterna is making against us.
Specifically, we are defending ourself against Acterna’s allegations by seeking
declaratory judgment that our products do not infringe any of the ‘721 patent,
the ‘300 patent, the ‘963 patent, the ‘108 patent, or the ‘766 patent; that the
‘721 patent, the ‘300 patent, the ‘963 patent, the ‘108 patent, and the ‘766
patent are invalid; and that the ‘721 patent, the ‘300 patent, the ‘963 patent,
the ‘108 patent, and the ‘766 patent are unenforceable. In addition, we are
seeking declaratory judgment that our products do not infringe a sixth, recently
issued Acterna patent, United States Patent No. 6,738,454 (the “‘454 patent”).
The ‘454 patent is a continuation patent issued May 18, 2004 related to the ‘721
patent, the ‘300 patent, and the ‘963 patent. We are also seeking declaratory
judgment that the ‘454 patent is invalid and unenforceable.
In
October 2004, we learned that Acterna and Consultronics had reached a settlement
with respect to Acterna’s claim against Consultronics and that the matter with
respect to Consultronics had been dismissed with prejudice.
On
January 5, 2005, Acterna asserted in the Maryland case that our products also
infringe its ‘454 patent.
On March
18, 2005, we received a letter from Acterna asserting that the CaLan 3010
product, a product manufactured by one of our subsidiaries, may infringe two
additional Acterna patents, United States Patent Nos. 5,867,842 and 5,867,206
(respectively, the “‘842 patent” and the “‘206 patent”). On April 15, 2005, we
filed a lawsuit against Acterna in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, seeking declaratory judgment that we do not
infringe the ‘842 patent or the ‘206 patent, and that such patents are invalid
and unenforceable.
On May
10, 2005, we filed a lawsuit against Acterna in the United Stated District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas. The lawsuit alleges that Acterna’s HST-3000
infringes our United States Patent No. 6,891,803, a new patent that issued to us
earlier that same day. We are seeking injunctive relief, unspecified damages,
attorneys’ fees and costs.
We are
presently unable to estimate the likely costs of the litigation and/or any
settlement of these legal proceedings with Acterna.
From time
to time, we may be involved in litigation or other legal proceedings, including
those noted above, relating to claims arising out of our day-to-day operations
or otherwise. Litigation is inherently uncertain, and we could experience
unfavorable rulings. Should we experience an unfavorable ruling, there exists
the possibility of a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results
of operations, cash flows or on our business for the period in which the ruling
occurs and/or future periods.
Results
of Operations
Comparison
of Three-Month Periods Ended March 31, 2005 and 2004
Net
Sales. Net
sales decreased 15% to $11.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005,
from $13.8 million for the same period of 2004. Sales of our wire line access
products decreased by $2.3 million, sales of our cable broadband products
increased by $0.4 million, sales of our fiber optics products increased by $0.2
million, and sales of our protocol products decreased by $0.3 million. The
decrease in wireline sales was the primarily the result of decreases in orders
for our SSMTT products as carriers determine the best access policy for their
networks and greater than usual seasonal decline. Among cable broadband
products, increased sales of our CM product line reflected aggressive VoIP
deployment by carriers and demand for high-end central office monitoring
devices. Shipment delays, due to component changes, prevented additional growth
in CM product sales during the quarter, resulting in a substantial increase in
backlog. Among fiber optics products, sales growth was attributable to increased
sales of our Optical Testing Toolkit on the SunSet MTT platform. The decrease in
signaling product sales is due to lower sales of our 3G Master and Gephardo
products. During the three months ended March 31, 2005, our sales were not
significantly affected by changes in prices.
Sales for
the three months ended March 31, 2005 decreased $2.3 million, or 30%, in North
America, $0.2 million, or 6%, in Asia/Pacific and increased by $0.4 million, or
326%, in Latin America, compared with the same period of 2004. Sales were
unchanged in Europe/Africa/Middle East. The decrease in North American
sales was primarily due to decreased sales of our wireline access and fiber
optics products, which were partially offset by increased sales of our cable
broadband products. The decrease in Asia is largely the result of declines in
sales of wireline access and protocol products, which was partially offset by
increased sales of our fiber optics and broadband products. Our sales in Europe
largely saw a decrease in wireline products which was offset by increased sales
of our cable broadband and fiber optics products. Sales to Latin America
remain a small part of our business; small changes in order volume from this
region can represent large percentage fluctuations, as was the case during the
three months ended March 31, 2005. International sales, including sales to
Canada, decreased to $6.8 million, or 58% of net sales, for the three months
ended March 31, 2005, from $6.9 million, or 50% of net sales, for the same
period of 2004.
Cost
of Sales. Cost
of sales remained substantially unchanged at $4.0 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2005, and 2004. Cost of sales represented 34% and 29% of net
sales for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The
increased cost of sales as a percentage of sales was primarily the result of the
decrease in net sales relative to fixed manufacturing costs.
Research
and Development. Research
and development expenses increased 17% to $4.6 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2005, from $3.9 million for the same period of 2004. This
increase is primarily due to increased payroll costs of $0.7 million in response
to increased headcount and the establishment of an R&D center in Beijing
China, which were partially offset by a $0.1 million decrease in stock-based
compensation charges. Stock-based compensation charges ended in 2004
because we fully amortized the deferred stock-based compensation, which related
to certain options issued during 1999 and 2000.
Research
and development expenses were 39% of net sales during the three months ended
March 31, 2005 and 28% of net sales for the corresponding period in 2004.
Research and development expenses tend to fluctuate from period to period,
depending on requirements at the various stages of our product development
cycles. In any given time period, research and development expenses may increase
in absolute dollars and/or as a percentage of sales, as we continue to invest in
product development and expand our product lines.
Selling
and Marketing. Selling
and marketing expenses increased 22% to $4.9 million for the three months ended
March 31, 2005, from $4.0 million for the same period of 2004. This increase is
primarily due to a $0.7 million increase in payroll costs and a $0.1 million
increase in costs for travel, trade shows, and outside marketing services. We
have increased headcount and increased our selling and marketing activities to
achieve greater sales presence with key accounts. These increases were partially
offset by a $0.1 million decrease in stock-based compensation charges and a $0.1
million decrease in outside commission expense. Selling and marketing expenses
were 41% and 29% of net sales for the three months ended March 30, 2005 and
2004, respectively.
General
and Administrative. General
and administrative expenses increased 74% to $3.2 million for the three months
ended March 31, 2005, from $1.8 million for the same period of 2004. This
increase is primarily from increased legal fees of $0.8 million related to our
litigation with Acterna and from other professional services costs, which have
increased as a result of higher audit costs and the increased corporate costs
for supporting our widening network of international sales offices. Costs from
the end of our stock-based compensation charges were $0.3 million in 2004 and
did not recur in 2005. General and administrative expenses were 27% and 13% of
net sales for the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
General and administrative expenses may increase in absolute dollars in future
periods, as we expect legal expenditures to increase as a result of our patent
litigation with Acterna and other patent prosecution. See the discussion of our
litigation in the "Overview" section of this MD&A.
Other
Income, Net. Other
income, net primarily consists of interest earned on cash and investment
balances, gains and losses on assets, liabilities, and transactions denominated
in foreign currencies, and realized investment gains and losses. Other income,
net increased to $0.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2005, from
$0.1 million for the same period of 2004. This was primarily due to foreign
exchange fluctuations.
Income
Taxes Expense. Income
tax expense consists primarily of federal, state, and international income
taxes. We recorded income tax expense of $0.1 million for the three months ended
March 31, 2005 and $7.5 million for the same period of 2004. During the three
months ended March 31, 2004, we recorded a valuation allowance of $7.4 million
against our deferred tax assets in most jurisdictions. See Notes to
Financial Statements (9) - Income
Taxes for
additional details on the valuation allowance against deferred tax
assets.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
Cash
Requirements and Capital Resources
At March
31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, we had working capital of $43.9 million and
$50.6 million, respectively, and cash and cash equivalents and short-term
investments of $31.9 million and $33.9 million, respectively. The fair value of
our investment in marketable securities was $1.5 million and $1.4 million at
March 31, 2005 and December 31, 2004, respectively. This investment consisted
entirely of the common stock of Top Union, which we consider to be
"available-for-sale," as that term is defined in SFAS No. 115, Accounting
for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities.
Accordingly, we carry this investment at its fair value on our balance sheet,
with the unrealized gain deferred as a component of stockholders' equity.
Because our holding is large relative to the normal trading volume in Top Union
stock, we do not consider this to be a liquid investment, and therefore, we
classify it as a non-current asset.
We
believe that current cash balances and future cash flows from operations will be
sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for our operations, complete
needed business projects, achieve our plans and objectives, meet financial
commitments, meet working capital requirements, make capital expenditures, and
fund other activities well beyond the next 12 months. However, large
acquisitions of complementary businesses, products, or technologies, or material
joint ventures could require us to obtain additional equity or debt financing.
We cannot assure you that such additional financing would be available on
acceptable terms, if at all.
Sources
and Uses of Cash
In
general, we have financed our operations and capital expenditures primarily
using cash flows generated by our operating activities, and we foresee
continuing to rely on cash flows from our operating activities and existing cash
resources to fund our business activities during at least the next 12
months.
Cash
provided by operating activities was $1.0 million during the three months ended
March 31, 2005, compared with $3.8 million during the same period of 2004. The
$2.8 million decrease in cash provided by operating activities was primarily due
to a $1.8 million decrease in cash received from customers and an $0.7 million
increase in cash paid to suppliers and employees. The decrease in cash received
from customers is primarily attributable to decreased sales in the three months
ended March 31, 2005 over the comparable period in 2004 and extended payment
terms offered to large customers by certain of our subsidiaries. The increase in
cash paid to suppliers and employees was primarily the result of increased
investment in sales activities and the associated increased headcount. In
general, our ability to continue to generate positive cash flows from operations
will depend on our ability to generate and collect cash from future sales, while
maintaining a cost structure lower than those sales amounts. Therefore, sales
volume is the most significant uncertainty in our ability to maintain positive
cash flows from operations.
Cash used
in investing activities was $1.1 million during the three months ended March 31,
2005, compared with $5.4 million during the same period of 2004. During the
three months ended March 31, 2005, we made $0.7 million in capital expenditures
and invested $2.4 million in short-term investments offset by the sale of $2.0
million in short-term investments. During the three months ended March 31, 2004,
capital expenditures were $0.4 million and investments in short-term investments
were $9.0 million offset by sales of $4.0 million in short-term investments. As
of March 31, 2005, we had no plans for large capital expenditures outside the
usual course of those needed for our ongoing production, research and
development, and selling and marketing activities.
Cash used
in financing activities was $2.1 million during the three months ended March 31,
2005, compared with $2.7 million during the same period of 2004. During the
first three months of 2005, the primary financing activities that used cash were
cash dividends of $2.5 million and the repayment of $0.1 million on notes
payable. The primary financing activities that provided cash were $0.2
million in proceeds from employees exercising stock options and a $0.3 million
decrease in amounts held in restricted cash. During the first three months of
2004, the primary financing activities that used cash were cash dividends of
$2.5 million, an increase in restricted cash of $0.2 million and the repayment
of $0.1 million on notes payable. The primary financing activities that
provided cash were $0.1 million from employees exercising stock
options.
Our
outstanding debt at March 31, 2005 consisted primarily of a $0.9 million loan
from the Italian government for research and development use that is payable in
semi-annual payments that started in the second half of 2003 and ending in 2011,
and three notes payable, related to acquisitions, totaling $0.1 million that are
being paid in quarterly installments ending in 2006. We have not used
off-balance sheet financing arrangements, issued or purchased derivative
instruments linked to our stock, or used our stock as a form of liquidity. We do
not believe that there are any known or reasonably likely changes in credit
ratings or ratings outlook, or an inability to achieve such changes, which would
have any significant impact on our operations. We are not subject to any debt
covenants that we believe might have a material impact on our
business.
Debt
Instruments, Guarantees, and Related Covenants
We have
low levels of debt, and our operating, financing, and investing activities are
not subject to any significant constraints related to outstanding debt,
guarantees, or other contingent obligations. We are not, and during at least the
next 12 months are not reasonably likely to be, in breach of debt covenants, and
we are not subject to any significant debt covenants that may limit our ability
to borrow additional funds or issue equity securities.
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
As of
March 31, 2005, we did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements that have or
are reasonably likely to have a material effect on our current or future
financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, or
capital resources.
Contractual
Obligations
During
the three months ended March 31, 2005, there were no material changes outside
the ordinary course of our business in long-term debt obligations, capital lease
obligations, operating lease obligations, purchase obligations, or any other
long-term liabilities reflected on our condensed consolidated balance
sheet.
Critical
Accounting Policies
The
preparation of financial statements in accordance with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America requires us to make
estimates, assumptions, and judgments that affect the amounts reported in our
consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes. We base our
estimates on historical experience and various other assumptions that we believe
to be reasonable. Although these estimates are based on our present best
knowledge of the future impact on the Company of current events and actions,
actual results may differ from these estimates, assumptions, and judgments.
We
consider “critical” those accounting policies that require our most subjective
or complex judgments, which often result from a need to make estimates about the
effect of matters that are inherently uncertain, and that are among the most
important of our accounting policies to the portrayal of our financial condition
and results of operations. These critical accounting policies are determination
of our allowance for doubtful accounts receivable, valuation of excess and
obsolete inventory, valuation of goodwill and other intangible assets,
accounting for the liability of product warranty, deferred income tax assets and
liabilities, and revenue recognition.
Our
management has reviewed our critical accounting policies and the related
disclosures with our Audit Committee. These policies and our procedures related
to these policies are described further in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2004 in Item 7, "Management's Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations," under the heading "
Critical Accounting Policies."
Risk
Factors Affecting Future Operating Results
Quarterly
Fluctuations—Because
our quarterly operating results have fluctuated significantly in the past and
are likely to fluctuate significantly in the future, our stock price may be
volatile.
In the
past, we have experienced significant fluctuations in our quarterly results due
to a number of factors. In the future, our quarterly operating results may
fluctuate significantly and may be difficult to predict given the nature of our
business. Many factors could cause our operating results to fluctuate from
quarter to quarter, including the following:
• the size
and timing of orders from our customers, which may be exacerbated by the
increased length and unpredictability of our customers’ buying patterns, and
limitations on our ability to ship these orders on a timely basis;
• the
degree to which our customers have allocated and spent their yearly budgets;
• the
uneven pace of technological innovation, the development of products responding
to these technological innovations by us and our competitors, and customer
acceptance of these products and innovations;
• the
varied degree of price, product, and technology competition, and our customers’
and competitors’ responses to these changes;
• the
relative percentages of our products sold domestically and internationally;
• the mix
of the products we sell and the varied margins associated with these products;
• the
timing of our customers’ budget processes; and
• economic
downturns reducing demand for telecommunication and cable equipment and
services.
The
factors listed above may affect our business and stock price in several ways.
Given our high fixed costs from overhead, research and development, and
advertising and marketing, and other activities necessary to run our business,
if our net sales are below our expectations in any quarter, we may not be able
to adjust spending accordingly. Our stock price may decline and may be volatile,
particularly if public market analysts and investors perceive the factors listed
above may contribute to unfavorable changes in operating results. Furthermore,
the above factors, taken together may make it more difficult for us to issue
additional equity in the future or raise debt financing to fund future
acquisitions and accelerate growth.
Sales
Implementation Cycles—The
length and unpredictability of the sales and implementation cycles for our
products makes it difficult to forecast revenues.
Sales of
our products often entail an extended decision-making process on the part of
prospective customers. We frequently experience delays following initial contact
with a prospective customer and expend substantial funds and management effort
pursuing these sales. Our ability to forecast the timing and amount of specific
sales is therefore limited. As a result, the uneven buying patterns of our
customers may cause fluctuations in our operating results, which could cause our
stock price to decline.
Other
sources of delays that lead to long sales cycles, or even a sales loss, include
current and potential customers’ internal budgeting procedures, internal
approval and contracting procedures, procurement practices, and testing and
acceptance processes. Recently, our customers’ budgeting procedures have
lengthened. The sales cycle for larger deployments now typically ranges from six
to twenty-four months. The deferral or loss of one or more significant sales
could significantly affect our operating results, especially if there are
significant selling and marketing expenses associated with the deferred or lost
sales.
Dependence
on Wireline Access Products—A
significant portion of our sales have been from our wireline access products,
which makes our future sales and overall business vulnerable to product
obsolescence and technological change.
Sales of
our DSL and other wireline access products represented 41% of our net sales
during the first three months of 2005, 43% and
44% of our net sales during the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003
respectively. Currently, our DSL products are primarily used by a limited number
of incumbent local exchange carriers, including the regional Bell operating
companies, and competitive local exchange carriers who offer DSL services. These
parties, and other Internet service providers and users, are continuously
evaluating alternative high-speed data access technologies, including cable
modems, fiber optics, wireless technology, and satellite technologies, and may
at any time adopt these competing technologies. These competing technologies may
ultimately prove to be superior to DSL services and reduce or eliminate the
demand for our DSL products.
Product
Development—If
we are unable to develop new products successfully and enhance our existing
products, our future success may be threatened.
The
market for our products is characterized by rapid technological advances,
changes in customer requirements and preferences, evolving industry and
customer-specific protocol standards, and frequent new product enhancements and
introductions. Our existing products and our products currently under
development could be rendered obsolete by the introduction of products involving
competing technologies, by the evolution of alternative technologies or new
industry protocol standards, or by rival products of our competitors. These
market conditions are more complex and challenging because of the high degree to
which the telecommunications industry is fragmented.
We
believe our future success will depend, in part, upon our ability, on a timely
and cost-effective basis, to continue to do the following:
• anticipate
and respond to varied and rapidly changing customer preferences and
requirements, a process made more challenging by our customers’ buying patterns;
• anticipate
and develop new products and solutions for networks based on emerging
technologies, such as the asynchronous transfer mode protocol that packs digital
information into cells to be routed across a network, and internet telephony,
which comprises voice, video, image, and data across the Internet, that are
likely to be characterized by continuing technological developments, evolving
industry standards, and changing customer requirements;
• invest in
research and development to enhance our existing products and to introduce new
verification and diagnostic products for the telecommunications, internet, cable
network, and other markets; and
• support
our products by investing in effective advertising, marketing, and customer
support.
We cannot
ensure that we will accomplish these objectives, and our failure to do so could
have a material adverse impact on our market share, business, and financial
results.
Furthermore,
our expenditures devoted to research and development may be considered high for
our level of sales. If these efforts do not result in the development of
products that generate strong sales for us or if we do not continue to reduce
these expenditures, our profit levels will not return to their desired levels.
If we reduce this spending, we may not be able to develop needed new products,
which could negatively impact our sources of new revenues.
Customer
Concentration—A
limited number of customers account for a high percentage of our net sales, and
any adverse factor affecting these customers or our relationship with these
customers could cause our net sales to decrease
significantly.
Our
customer base is concentrated, and a relatively small number of companies have
accounted for a large percentage of our net sales. Net sales
from our top ten customers represented approximately 15% of total net sales
during the three months ended March 31, 2005 and 26% of
total net sales in 2004 and 36% in 2003. In general, our customers are not
subject to long-term supply contracts with us and are not obligated to purchase
a specific amount of products from us or to provide us with binding forecasts of
purchases for any period. The decline in customer concentration over the prior
three years is primarily the result of our expanded international sales
presence.
The loss
of a major customer or the reduction, delay, or cancellation of orders from one
or more of our significant customers could cause our net sales and, therefore,
profits to decline. In addition, many of our customers are able to exert
substantial negotiating leverage over us. As a result, they may cause us to
lower our prices to them, and they may successfully negotiate other terms and
provisions that may negatively affect our business and profits.
Competition—Competition
could reduce our market share and decrease our net sales.
The
market for our products is fragmented and intensely competitive, both inside and
outside the United States, and is subject to rapid technological change,
evolving industry standards, regulatory developments, and varied and changing
customer preferences and requirements. We compete with a number of United States
and international suppliers that vary in size and in the scope and breadth of
the products and services offered.
The
following table sets forth our principal competitors in each of our product
categories:
Product
Category |
|
Principal
Competitors |
|
|
|
Wireline
Access |
|
Acterna
Corporation; Agilent Technologies, Inc.; Consultronics; Fluke Corporation;
3M Dynatel; Trend Communications; |
|
|
|
Fiber
Optics SONET/SDH |
|
Acterna
Corporation; Agilent Technologies, Inc.; Exfo Electro-Optical Engineering
Inc.; NetTest; Trend Communications |
|
|
|
Cable
Broadband |
|
Acterna
Corporation; Agilent Technologies, Inc.; Trilithic,
Inc. |
|
|
|
Protocol |
|
Agilent
Technologies, Inc.; NetTest; Tektronix,
Inc. |
Many of
these competitors have longer operating histories, larger installed customer
bases, longer relationships with customers, wider name recognition and product
offerings, and greater financial, technical, marketing, customer service, and
other resources than we have.
We expect
that as our industry and markets evolve new competitors or alliances among
competitors with existing and new technologies may emerge and acquire
significant market share. We anticipate that competition in our markets will
increase, and we will face continued threats to our market share and price
pressure on our products. Also, over time, our profitability, if any, may
decrease. In addition, it is difficult to assess accurately the market share of
our products or of Sunrise overall because of the high degree of fragmentation
in the market for service verification equipment. As a result, it may be
difficult for us to forecast accurately trends in the market, which of our
products will be the most competitive over the longer term, and therefore, what
is the best use of our cash and human and other forms of capital.
Managing
Growth and Slowdowns—We
may have difficulty managing expansions and contractions in our operations,
which could reduce our chances of maintaining or restoring our
profitability.
We
experienced rapid growth in revenues and in our business during 1999 and 2000
followed by significant slowdowns in 2001 and 2002 that have placed, and may
continue to place, a significant strain on our management and operations. Our
revenues increased to $113.5 million in 2000 from $61.5 million in 1999, fell to
$79.1 million in 2001 and then to $54.3 million in 2002. Revenues increased
slightly to $54.9 million in 2003 and grew to $61.7 million in 2004. Revenues
during the first quarter of 2005 declined to $11.7 million from $13.8 million in
the first quarter of 2004. As a result of our historical growth and potential
future growth or slowdowns, we face several risks, including the following:
• the need
to improve our operational, financial, management, informational, and control
systems;
• the need
to hire, train, and retain highly skilled personnel; and
• the
challenge to manage expense reductions without impacting development strategies
or our long-term goals.
We cannot
ensure that we will be able to successfully manage growth or slowdowns
successfully or profitably.
Risks
of International Operations—Our
plan to expand sales in international markets could lead to higher operating
expenses and may subject us to unpredictable regulatory and political
systems.
Sales to
customers located outside of the United States represented 58% of our net sales
during the first three months of 2005, 49% of our net sales in fiscal 2004, and
39% in fiscal 2003, and we expect international revenues to continue to account
for a significant percentage of net sales for the foreseeable future. In
addition, an important part of our strategy calls for further expansion into
international markets. As a result, we will face various risks relating to our
international operations, including the following:
• potentially
higher operating expenses, resulting from the establishment of international
offices, the hiring of additional and local personnel, and the localization and
marketing of products for particular countries’ technologies;
• the need
to establish relationships with government-owned or subsidized
telecommunications providers and with additional distributors;
• fluctuations
in foreign currency exchange rates and the risks of using hedging strategies to
minimize our exposure to these fluctuations;
• potentially
adverse tax consequences related to acquisitions and operations, including the
ability to claim goodwill deductions and a foreign tax credit against U.S.
federal income taxes; and
• possible
disruptions to our customers, sales channels, sources of supply, or production
facilities due to wars, terrorist acts, acts of protest or civil disobedience,
or other conflicts between or within various nations and due to variations in
crime rates and the rule of law between nations.
We cannot
ensure that one or more of these factors will not materially and adversely
affect our ability to expand into international markets or our revenues and
profits.
In
addition, the Asia/Pacific and Latin America regions, both high-growth emerging
markets for communications equipment, have experienced instability in many of
their economies and significant devaluations in local currencies. Sales from
customers in these regions represented 31% of our sales in the first quarter of
2005, 24% of our sales in fiscal 2004 and 22% of our sales in fiscal 2003. These
instabilities may continue or worsen, which could have a materially adverse
effect on our results of operations. If international revenues are not adequate
to offset the additional expense of expanding international operations, our
future growth and profitability could suffer.
Manufacturing
Capacity—If
demand for our products does not match our manufacturing capacity, our earnings
may suffer.
We cannot
immediately adapt our production capacity and related cost structures to rapidly
changing market conditions. When demand does not meet our expectations or
manufacturing capacity exceeds our production requirements, profitability may
decline. Conversely, if during a market upturn we cannot increase our
manufacturing capacity to meet product demand, we will not be able to fulfill
orders in a timely manner, which in turn may have a negative effect on our
earnings and overall business.
Operations
in Taiwan—We
rely on our subsidiary in Taiwan to manufacture a substantial portion of our
products, and our reputation and results of operations could be adversely
affected if this subsidiary does not perform as we expect.
We
produce a substantial portion of our products at our subsidiary in Taiwan and we
have recently expanded our manufacturing facility there. Taiwan production
represented approximately 75% of our products during the first quarter of 2005,
and approximately 60% in the first quarter of 2004. We depend on our subsidiary
to produce a sufficient volume of our products in a timely fashion and at
satisfactory quality levels. If we fail to manage our subsidiary so that it
produces quality products on time and in sufficient quantities, our reputation
and results of operations could suffer. In addition, we rely on our Taiwan
subsidiary to place orders with suppliers for the components they need to
manufacture our products. If they fail to place timely and sufficient orders
with their suppliers, our results of operations could suffer.
The cost,
quality, and availability of our Taiwan operation is essential to the successful
production and sale of our products. Our increasing reliance on this foreign
subsidiary for manufacturing exposes us to risks that are not under our
immediate control and which could negatively impact our results of operations.
In addition, transportation delays and interruptions, political and economic
regulations, and natural disasters could also adversely impact our Taiwan
operation and negatively impact our results of operations. See “Risk Factors
Affecting Future Operating Results—Dependence on Sole and Single Source
Suppliers and—Risks of International Operations” for a discussion of risks
associated with concentrating production activities at one facility that is
outside the United States.
Dependence
on Sole and Single Source Suppliers—Because
we depend on a limited number of suppliers and some sole and single source
suppliers that are not bound by long-term contracts, our future supply of parts
is uncertain.
We
purchase many key parts, such as microprocessors, field programmable gate
arrays, bus interface chips, optical components, and oscillators, from single
source or sole suppliers, and we license certain software from third parties. We
rely exclusively on third-party subcontractors to manufacture some
sub-assemblies, and we have retained, from time to time, third party design
services in the development of our products. We do not have long-term supply
agreements with these vendors. In general, we make advance purchases of some
products and components to help ensure an adequate supply. In the past, we have
experienced supply problems as a result of financial or operating difficulties
of our suppliers, shortages, and discontinuations resulting from component
obsolescence or other shortages or allocations by suppliers. Our reliance on
these third parties involves a number of risks, including the following:
• the
unavailability of critical products and components on a timely basis, on
commercially reasonable terms, or at all;
• the
unavailability of products or software licenses, resulting in the need to
qualify new or alternative products or develop or license new software for our
use and/or to reconfigure our products and manufacturing process, which could be
lengthy and expensive;
• the
likelihood that, if these products are not available, we would suffer an
interruption in the manufacture and shipment of our products until the products
or alternatives become available;
• reduced
control over product quality and cost, risks that are exacerbated by the need to
respond, at times, to unanticipated changes and increases in customer orders;
• the
unavailability of, or interruption in, access to some process technologies; and
• exposure
to the financial problems and stability of our suppliers.
In
addition, the purchase of these components on a sole source basis subjects us to
risks of price increases and potential quality assurance problems. This
dependence magnifies the risk that we may not be able to ship our products on a
timely basis to satisfy customers’ orders. We cannot ensure that one or more of
these factors will not cause delays or reductions in product shipments or
increases in product costs, which in turn could have a material adverse effect
on our business.
Intellectual
Property Risks—Policing
any unauthorized use of our intellectual property by third parties and defending
any intellectual property infringement claims against us could be expensive and
disrupt our business.
Our
intellectual property and proprietary technology are an important part of our
business, and we depend on the development and use of various forms of
intellectual property and proprietary technology. As a result, we are subject to
several related risks, including the risks of unauthorized use of our
intellectual property and the costs of protecting our intellectual property.
Much of
our intellectual property and proprietary technology is not protected by
patents. If unauthorized persons were to copy, obtain, or otherwise
misappropriate our intellectual property or proprietary technology without our
approval, the value of our investment in research and development would decline,
our reputation and brand could be diminished, and we would likely suffer a
decline in revenue. We believe these risks, which are present in any business in
which intellectual property and proprietary technology play an important role,
are exacerbated by the difficulty in finding unauthorized use of intellectual
property in our business, the increasing incidence of patent infringement in our
industry in general, and the difficulty of enforcing intellectual property
rights in some foreign countries.
In
addition, litigation has in the past been, and may in the future be, necessary
to enforce our intellectual property rights and/or defend against the
accusations of others. For example, we are currently engaged in complex patent
litigation with one of our main competitors, Acterna, LLC. In this litigation,
we have been accused of violating six Acterna patents currently, and Acterna has
asserted that we may be infringing two additional Acterna patents. By the same
token, we have accused Acterna of violating two of our patents. The litigation
is being fought in multiple jurisdictions. This kind of litigation is
time-consuming and expensive to prosecute or resolve, and results in a
substantial diversion of management resources. We cannot ensure that we will be
successful in this or other similar types of litigation, that our intellectual
property rights will be held valid and enforceable in any litigation, or that we
will otherwise be able to protect our intellectual property and proprietary
technology.
In the
future, we may receive notices from Acterna or other holders of patents that
raise issues as to possible infringement by our products. As the number of
telecommunications test, measurement, and network management products increases
and the functionality of these products further overlap, we believe that we may
become subject to allegations of infringement given the nature of the
telecommunications industry and the high incidence of these kinds of claims.
Questions of infringement and the validity of patents in the field of
telecommunications technologies involve highly technical and subjective
analyses. These kinds of proceedings are time consuming and expensive to defend
or resolve, result in a substantial diversion of management resources, cause
product shipment delays, and could force us to enter into royalty or license
agreements rather than dispute the merits of the proceedings initiated against
us.
Potential
Product Liability—Our
products are complex, and our failure to detect errors and defects may subject
us to costly repairs and product returns under warranty and product liability
litigation.
Our
products are complex and may contain undetected defects or errors when first
introduced or as enhancements are released. These errors may occur despite our
testing and may not be discovered until after a product has been shipped and
used by our customers. Also, many of the products that we ship contain known
imperfections that we consider to be insignificant at the time of shipment. We
may misjudge the seriousness of a product imperfection when we allow it to be
shipped to our customers. These risks are compounded by the fact that we offer
many products, with multiple hardware and software modifications, which makes it
more difficult to ensure high standards of quality control in our manufacturing
process. The existence of errors or defects could result in costly repairs
and/or returns of products under warranty and, more generally, in delayed market
acceptance of the product or damage to our reputation and business.
In
addition, the terms of our customer agreements and purchase orders, which
provide us with protection against unwarranted claims of product defects and
errors, may not protect us adequately from unwarranted claims against us, unfair
verdicts if a claim were to go to trial, settlement of these kinds of claims, or
future regulation or laws regarding our products. Our defense against such
claims in the future, regardless of their merit, could result in substantial
expense to us, diversion of management time and attention, and damage to our
business reputation and our ability to retain existing customers or attract new
customers.
Risks
of the Telecommunications Industry—We
face several risks related to the telecommunications industry, including the
possible effects of its unpredictable growth or decline, the possible effects of
consolidation among our principal customers, and the risk that deregulation will
slow.
After the
passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the telecommunications industry
experienced rapid growth. The growth led to great innovations in technology,
intense competition, short product life cycles, and, to some extent, regulatory
uncertainty inside and outside the United States. However, the course of the
development of the telecommunications industry is difficult to predict.
Companies operating in this industry have a difficult time forecasting future
trends and developments and forecasting customer acceptance of competing
technologies. One possible effect of this uncertainty is that there is, and may
continue to be, a delay or a reduction in these companies’ investment in their
business and purchase of related equipment, such as our products, and a
reduction in their and our access to capital. In addition, deregulation may
result in a delay or a reduction in the procurement cycle because of the general
uncertainty involved with the transition period of businesses.
The
growth that occurred after the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 has
slowed dramatically, and it is unknown whether or when it will resume. This
slowdown has resulted in reduced investment in the telecommunications industry
in general and delayed purchase orders for service verification equipment such
as our products in particular. It is not possible to predict whether this
slowdown will be temporary or sustained.
In
addition, the telecommunications industry has been experiencing consolidation
among its primary participants, such as incumbent local exchange carriers and
competitive local exchange carriers, several of whom are our primary customers.
Continued consolidation may cause delay or cancellation of orders for our
products. The consolidation of our customers will likely provide them with
greater negotiating leverage with us and may lead them to pressure us to lower
the prices of our products.
Goodwill
Valuation—Our
financial results could be materially and adversely affected if we determine
that the book value of goodwill is higher than its fair
value.
Our
balance sheet at March 31, 2005 includes an amount designated as "goodwill" that
represents approximately 12% of our total assets and 14% of our total
stockholders' equity. Goodwill arises when an acquirer pays more for a business
than the fair value of the acquired tangible and separately measurable
intangible net assets. Under accounting pronouncement SFAS No. 142, Goodwill
and Other Intangible Assets,
beginning in January 2002, goodwill is no longer amortized, but it is subject to
an "impairment test" at least annually, and more frequently if circumstances
indicate a possible impairment. The impairment testing begins with a market
capitalization analysis. Under this test, if our market capitalization were to
diminish significantly, we would be required to compare the book value of
goodwill to its fair value, and if the book value is higher than the fair value,
we would record a non-cash impairment charge for the difference, which,
depending on the amount, could materially and adversely affect our net income or
loss and earnings per share. Subsequent to March 31, 2005, the market
capitalization of the Company has declined such that such that, if the decline
should prove more than temporary, an evaluation of the book value of goodwill
would be required, which could result in an impairment charge.
Dependence
on Key Employees—If
one or more of our senior managers were to leave, we could experience difficulty
in replacing them and our operating results could suffer.
Our
success depends to a significant extent upon the continued service and
performance of a relatively small number of key senior management, technical,
sales, and marketing personnel. In particular, the loss of either of our two
founders, Paul Ker-Chin Chang or Paul A. Marshall, would likely harm our
business. Neither of these individuals is bound by an employment agreement with
us, and we do not carry key man life insurance. If any of our senior managers
were to leave, we would need to devote substantial resources and management
attention to replace them. As a result, management attention may be diverted
from managing our business, and we may need to pay higher compensation to
replace these employees.
Acquisitions—We
have acquired several companies and lines of business, and we may pursue
additional acquisitions in the future. These activities involve numerous risks,
including the use of cash, acquired intangible assets, and the diversion of
management attention.
We have
acquired multiple companies and lines of business. As a result of these
acquisitions, we face numerous challenges, including the following:
· Integrating
the existing management, sales force, technicians, and other personnel into one
culture and business;
· Integrating
manufacturing, administrative, and management information and other control
systems into our existing systems;
· Developing
and implementing an integrated business strategy over what had previously been
independent companies; and
· Developing
compatible or complementary products and technologies from previously
independent operations.
The risks
stated above are made more difficult because most of the companies we have
acquired are located outside of the United States. In addition, if we make
future acquisitions, these risks will be exacerbated by the need to integrate
additional operations at a time when we may not have fully integrated all of our
previous acquisitions.
If we
pursue additional acquisitions, we will face similar risks to those outlined
above and additional risks, including the following:
· The
diversion of our management's attention and the expense of identifying and
pursuing suitable acquisition candidates, whether or not
consummated;
· The
possible need to fund these acquisitions by dilutive issuances of equity
securities or by incurring debt; and
· The
potential negative effect on our financial statements from an increase in
intangible assets, the write-off of research and development costs, and the high
cost and expense of completing acquisitions.
We cannot
ensure that we will locate suitable acquisition candidates or that, if we do, we
will be able to acquire them and then integrate them effectively, efficiently,
and successfully into our business.
Concentration
of Control—Our
executive officers and directors retain significant control over us, which
allows them to decide the outcome of matters submitted to stockholders for
approval. This influence may not be beneficial to all
stockholders.
As of
March 31, 2005, Paul Ker-Chin Chang, Paul A. Marshall, and Robert C. Pfeiffer
beneficially owned approximately 25%, 23%, and 12%, respectively, of our
outstanding shares of common stock. Consequently, these three individuals
control approximately 60% of our outstanding shares of common stock and to the
extent that they act together would be able to control the election of our
directors and the approval of significant corporate transactions that must be
submitted to a vote of stockholders. In addition, Mr. Chang, Mr. Marshall, and
Mr. Pfeiffer constitute three of the six members of the board of directors and
have significant influence in directing the actions taken by the board. The
interests of these persons may conflict with the interests of other
stockholders, and the actions they take or approve may be contrary to those
desired by other stockholders. This concentration of ownership and control of
the management and affairs of our company may also have the effect of delaying
or preventing a change in control of our company that other stockholders may
consider desirable.
Anti-takeover
Provisions—Anti-takeover
provisions in our charter documents could prevent or delay a change of control
and, as a result, negatively impact our stockholders.
Some
provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may have the effect of
discouraging, delaying, or preventing a change in control of our company or
unsolicited acquisition proposals that some stockholders may consider favorable.
These provisions provide for the following:
· Authorizing
the issuance of "blank check" preferred stock;
· A
classified board of directors with staggered, three-year terms;
· Prohibiting
cumulative voting in the election of directors;
· Requiring
super-majority voting to effect certain amendments to our certificate of
incorporation and by-laws;
· Limiting
the persons who may call special meetings of stockholders;
· Prohibiting
stockholder action by written consent; and
· Establishing
advance notice requirements for nominations for election to the board of
directors or for proposing matters that can be acted upon at stockholders
meetings.
Some
provisions of Delaware law and our stock incentive plans may also have the
effect of discouraging, delaying, or preventing a change in control of our
company or unsolicited acquisition proposals. These provisions also could limit
the price that some investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares
of our common stock.
Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002—We
will be required to evaluate our system of internal control over financial
reporting and our independent auditor will be required to attest to its
effectiveness. Any deficiencies found in our internal control over financial
reporting or the inability of our independent auditor to certify its
effectiveness could negatively impact our stock price.
Effective
internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and
effectively prevent fraud. Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, we will be required, beginning as early as our fiscal year ending December
31, 2005, but no later than the year ending December 31, 2006, to include in our
annual report our assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting as of the end of fiscal year. Furthermore, our independent
auditor will be required to attest to whether our assessment of the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting is fairly stated
in all material respects and separately report on whether it believes we
maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial
reporting. We have not yet completed our assessment of the effectiveness of our
internal controls. If we fail to timely complete this assessment, or if our
independent auditor cannot timely attest to our assessment, we could be subject
to regulatory sanctions and a loss of public confidence in our internal
controls. In addition, failure to implement any new or improved controls deemed
necessary as a result of management or our auditor’s assessments, or
difficulties encountered in their implementation, could harm our operating
results or cause us to fail to timely meet our regulatory reporting obligations.
Any of these failures could adversely affect the price of our
stock.
ITEM
3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET
RISK
We sell
our products in North America, Asia, Europe, Africa, the Middle East, and Latin
America and maintain operations in several different countries. Changes in
currency exchange rates affect the valuation in our financial statements of the
assets and liabilities of these operations. We also have sales denominated in
Euros and the Canadian dollar, which are also affected by changes in currency
exchange rates. To hedge these risks, we have at certain times used derivative
financial instruments. However, as of March 31, 2005, we had no derivative
financial instruments or other foreign exchange risk hedging devices. With or
without hedges, our financial results could be affected by changes in foreign
currency exchange rates, although foreign exchange risks have not been material
to our financial position or results of operations in the past.
We are
exposed to the impact of interest rate changes and changes in the market values
of our investments. Our exposure to market rate risk for changes in interest
rates relates primarily to our investment portfolio. We have not held derivative
financial instruments in our investment portfolio. We may invest our excess cash
in depository accounts with financial institutions, in debt instruments of
United States governmental agencies, and in debt instruments of high-quality
corporate issuers, and, by policy, we limit the amount of credit exposure to any
one issuer. We seek to protect and preserve our invested funds by limiting
default, market, and reinvestment risk through portfolio diversification and
review of the financial stability of the institutions with which we deposit
funds and from whom we purchase debt instruments.
Investments
in both fixed rate and floating rate interest earning instruments carry a degree
of interest rate risk. Fixed rate securities may have their fair market value
adversely impacted due to a rise in interest rates, while floating rate
securities may produce less income than expected if interest rates fall. Due in
part to these factors, our future investment income may fall short of
expectations due to changes in interest rates, or we may suffer the loss of
principal if forced to sell securities that have declined in market value due to
changes in interest rates. Because our investment policy restricts us to
conservative, interest-bearing investments and because our business strategy
does not rely on generating material returns from our investment portfolio, we
do not expect our market risk exposure on our investment portfolio to be
material.
At March
31, 2005, we owned
2,957,480 shares of
the common stock of Top Union Electronics Corp. ("Top Union"), a Taiwan R.O.C.
corporation, which we acquired as a strategic investment primarily during the
years 1998 through 2000. These securities are considered to be
"available-for-sale," as that term is defined in SFAS No. 115, Accounting
for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, and
accordingly we carry them at their fair value on our balance sheet, with the
unrealized gain deferred as a component of stockholders' equity. Because our
holding is large relative to the normal trading volume in Top Union stock, we do
not consider this to be a liquid investment, and therefore, we classify it as a
non-current asset. The carrying amount of this investment on March 31, 2005 was
$1,540,000. This amount may be affected by an adverse movement of equity market
prices in Taiwan and internationally and would be affected by adverse movement
in exchange rates. As of March 31, 2005, we did not have any hedges to protect
our Top Union investment against adverse movements in equity prices or exchange
rates.
ITEM
4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
(a)
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
The
Securities and Exchange Commission defines the term “disclosure controls and
procedures” to mean a company’s controls and other procedures that are designed
to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports that it files
or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, is recorded,
processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified on the
Commission’s rules and forms. Our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief
Financial Officer have concluded, based on the evaluation of the effectiveness
of our disclosure controls and procedures by our management, with the
participation of our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer, as
of the end of the period covered by this report, that our disclosure controls
and procedures were effective for this purpose.
(b)
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There was
no change in our internal control over financial reporting during the three
months ended March 31, 2005 that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
PART
II OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM
1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
On March
31, 2004, Acterna, LLC (“Acterna”) filed a lawsuit against us and Consultronics,
Ltd. and Consultronics, Inc. (the latter two, collectively, “Consultronics”) in
the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. Acterna alleged
that our SunSet xDSL and SunSet MTT products infringe its United States Patent
Nos. 6,064,721 (the “‘721 patent”), 6,385,300 (the “‘300 patent”), and 6,590,963
(the “‘963 patent”) and that our STT product infringes its United States Patent
No. 5,511,108 (the “‘108 patent”). Acterna also alleged that the Consultronics
CoLT 450 product infringes its ‘721 patent. Acterna seeks injunctive relief,
unspecified damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs.
On April
23, 2004, we filed a lawsuit against Acterna in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California. The lawsuit alleged that Acterna’s
ANT-5 SDH Access Tester and ANT-20 Advanced Network Tester infringe our United
States Patent No. 5,619,489 (the “‘489 patent”). We are seeking injunctive
relief, unspecified damages, and attorneys’ fees and costs.
On
September 7, 2004, Acterna filed an answer in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California, seeking declaratory judgment that its
ANT-5 SDH Access Tester and ANT-20 Advanced Network Tester do not infringe the
‘489 patent, the ‘489 patent is invalid, and the ‘489 patent is unenforceable.
At the same time, Acterna also filed a counterclaim against us, alleging that
certain products, namely the CM 1000, CM 500, CM 250, N1776A, AT 2000 and AT
2500, all of which are manufactured and sold by our subsidiaries, infringe its
United States Patent No. 5,751,766 (the “‘766 patent”). Acterna seeks injunctive
relief, unspecified damages and attorneys fees and costs.
We
believe that the lawsuits against us are without merit, and we intend to defend
ourself vigorously against the allegations that Acterna is making against us.
Specifically, we are defending ourself against Acterna’s allegations by seeking
declaratory judgment that our products do not infringe any of the ‘721 patent,
the ‘300 patent, the ‘963 patent, the ‘108 patent, or the ‘766 patent; that the
‘721 patent, the ‘300 patent, the ‘963 patent, the ‘108 patent, and the ‘766
patent are invalid; and that the ‘721 patent, the ‘300 patent, the ‘963 patent,
the ‘108 patent, and the ‘766 patent are unenforceable. In addition, we are
seeking declaratory judgment that our products do not infringe a sixth, recently
issued Acterna patent, United States Patent No. 6,738,454 (the “‘454 patent”).
The ‘454 patent is a continuation patent issued May 18, 2004 related to the ‘721
patent, the ‘300 patent, and the ‘963 patent. We are also seeking declaratory
judgment that the ‘454 patent is invalid and unenforceable.
In
October 2004, we learned that Acterna and Consultronics had reached a settlement
with respect to Acterna’s claim against Consultronics and that the matter with
respect to Consultronics had been dismissed with prejudice.
On
January 5, 2005, Acterna asserted in the Maryland case that our products also
infringe its ‘454 patent.
On March
18, 2005, we received a letter from Acterna asserting that the CaLan 3010, a
product manufactured by one of our subsidiaries, may infringe two additional
Acterna patents, United States Patent Nos. 5,867,842 and 5,867,206
(respectively, the “‘842 patent” and the “‘206 patent”). On April 15, 2005, we
filed a lawsuit against Acterna in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, seeking declaratory judgment that we do not
infringe the ‘842 patent or the ‘206 patent, and that such patents are invalid
and unenforceable.
On May
10, 2005, we filed a lawsuit against Acterna in the United Stated District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas. The lawsuit alleges that Acterna’s HST-3000
infringes the United States Patent No. 6,891,803, a new patent that issued to us
earlier that same day. We are seeking injunctive relief, unspecified damages,
attorneys’ fees and costs.
We are
presently unable to estimate the likely costs of the litigation and/or any
settlement of these legal proceedings with Acterna.
From time
to time, we may be involved in litigation or other legal proceedings, including
those noted above, relating to claims arising out of our day-to-day operations
or otherwise. Litigation is inherently uncertain, and we could experience
unfavorable rulings. Should we experience an unfavorable ruling, there exists
the possibility of a material adverse impact on our financial condition, results
of operations, cash flows or on our business for the period in which the ruling
occurs and/or future periods.
ITEM
2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY
SECURITIES
AND USE OF PROCEEDS
None.
ITEM
3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
None.
ITEM
4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY
HOLDERS
None.
ITEM
5. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
ITEM
6. EXHIBITS
Exhibit
31.1—Certification
of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act and Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Exhibit
31.2—Certification
of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act and Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
Exhibit
32—Certification
of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto
duly authorized.
SUNRISE
TELECOM INCORPORATED
(Registrant)
Date: May
16, 2005
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
/s/ PAUL
KER-CHIN
CHANG |
|
|
Paul
Ker-Chin Chang
President
and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal
Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
/s/ Richard
D. Kent |
|
|
Richard
D. Kent
Chief
Financial Officer
(Principal
Financial Officer) |
EXHIBIT
INDEX
Exhibit
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
31.1 |
|
Certification
of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act and Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002. |
|
|
|
31.2 |
|
Certification
of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act and Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002. |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Certification
of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer Pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350. |
EXHIBIT
31.1
CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT
TO SECTION 302
I, Paul
Ker-Chin Chang, certify that:
1. |
I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sunrise Telecom
Incorporated. |
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 quarterly
report. |
4. |
The
registrant's other certifying officer 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 registrant's 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 registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting. |
5. |
The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function): |
|
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 registrant's 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 registrant's internal control
over financial reporting. |
Date: May
16, 2005
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
/s/ PAUL
KER-CHIN
CHANG |
|
|
Paul
Ker-Chin Chang
President
and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal
Executive Officer) |
EXHIBIT
31.2
CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT
TO SECTION 302
I,
Richard D. Kent, certify that:
1. |
I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Sunrise Telecom
Incorporated. |
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 quarterly
report. |
4. |
The
registrant's other certifying officer 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 registrant's 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 quarterly report based on such evaluation;
and |
|
c) |
Disclosed
in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
fiscal that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting. |
5. |
The
registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function): |
|
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 registrant's 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 registrant's internal control
over financial reporting. |
Date: May
16, 2005
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
/s/ Richard
D. Kent |
|
|
Richard
D. Kent
Chief
Financial Officer
(Principal
Financial Officer) |
EXHIBIT
32
CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
AND
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350
In
connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Sunrise
Telecom Incorporated for the three-month period ended March 31, 2005, we, Paul
Ker-Chin Chang, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Richard D. Kent,
Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of Sunrise Telecom Incorporated, hereby
certify to the best of our knowledge, that:
(1) |
Such
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three-month period ended March 31,
2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”)
fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
(2) |
The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Sunrise
Telecom Incorporated. |
Date: May
16, 2005
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
/s/ PAUL
KER-CHIN
CHANG |
|
|
Paul
Ker-Chin Chang
President
and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal
Executive Officer) |
Date: May
16, 2005
|
|
|
|
By: |
|
/s/ Richard
D. Kent |
|
|
Richard
D. Kent
Chief
Financial Officer
(Principal
Financial Officer) |