Back to GetFilings.com
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One) |
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
|
|
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 |
|
OR |
|
o
|
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
|
|
|
For the transition period
from to |
Commission file number 1-9802
Symbol Technologies, Inc.
(Exact name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
Delaware |
|
11-2308681 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization) |
|
(I.R.S Employer
Identification No.) |
One Symbol Plaza, Holtsville, New York |
|
11742-1300 |
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
(Zip Code) |
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
(631) 738-2400
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class |
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered |
|
|
|
Common Stock, Par Value $.01
|
|
New York Stock Exchange |
Securities registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the
Act:
None.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. YES þ NO o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not
contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of
registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or information
statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this
Form 10-K or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated
filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Act). YES þ NO o
The aggregate market value of the registrants voting and
non-voting common stock held by persons other than officers and
directors and affiliates thereof, as of the last business day of
the second fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2004 was
$2,992,420,096.
The number of shares outstanding of the registrants
classes of common stock, as of March 9, 2005, was as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Class |
|
Number of Shares | |
|
|
| |
COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $0.01
|
|
|
242,645,614 |
|
Documents Incorporated by Reference: Some of the information
required by Part III (Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and
14) is incorporated by reference from the registrants
definitive proxy statement, in connection with the
registrants 2005 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be
filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission
pursuant to Regulation 14A no later than April 30,
2005 (the Proxy Statement).
Table of Contents
Part I
References herein to Symbol, we,
us and our refer to Symbol Technologies,
Inc. and its subsidiaries unless the context specifically states
or implies otherwise.
OVERVIEW
We are a global leader in designing, developing, manufacturing
and servicing products and systems used in end-to-end enterprise
mobility solutions. Our products and solutions capture, move and
manage information in real time to assist our customers in
making more efficient business decisions. Our products include
advanced data capture products, mobile computing platforms,
wireless infrastructure, radio frequency identification
(RFID) infrastructure and tags and mobility software
and services, and are sold as both integrated solutions and
individual devices.
Our products and services are sold worldwide to a diverse set of
customers in markets such as retail, transportation and
logistics, manufacturing, wholesale and distribution, government
and healthcare. For the years ended December 31, 2004 and
December 31, 2003, we generated $1,732.1 million and
$1,530.3 million in revenue and $81.8 million and
$3.3 million in net earnings, respectively.
We operate in two reportable business segments: (1) the
design, development, manufacture and marketing of advanced data
capture, mobile computing, wireless infrastructure, RFID and
mobility software products and systems (Product
Segment); and (2) the servicing of, customer support
for and professional services related to these products and
systems (Services Segment). Operating and geographic
segment financial information is found in Note 18 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Symbol Technologies, Inc. is a Delaware corporation and is the
successor by merger in 1987 to Symbol Technologies, Inc., a New
York corporation that commenced operations in 1975.
Overview of market opportunity
Enterprise mobility solutions can help businesses increase
workforce productivity, improve customer service and enhance
operational efficiencies. These solutions assist enterprises and
their employees in delivering information in real time as
people, information and assets are on the move. Examples of
applications in which enterprise mobility products and solutions
provide valuable benefits include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
tracking and routing of assets as they move through the supply
chain; |
|
|
|
movement of goods in a retail store from product receipt to
final sale; |
|
|
|
verification that the correct medication is delivered to a
particular patient; |
|
|
|
delivery of customer information to a mobile worker prior to a
sales call; |
|
|
|
collection and communication of data by law enforcement
officials from accident sites and crime scenes; and |
|
|
|
gathering and dissemination of information to a retail sales
associate regarding a customers preferences. |
The enterprise mobility market is comprised of a number of large
and growing segments that together constitute these solutions:
|
|
|
|
|
Advanced Data Capture/ Scanning. The worldwide market for
bar code scanning devices is projected to grow from
$1.3 billion in 2003 to $1.8 billion in 2007, a
compound annual growth rate of 8%. |
|
|
|
Mobile Computers. The worldwide market for rugged
on-board, tablet, handheld, PDA and wearable mobile computers is
projected to grow from $2.5 billion in 2003 to
$3.6 billion in 2007, a compound annual growth rate of 9%.
Rugged mobile devices are typically used in
industrial and field settings |
1
|
|
|
|
|
and offer higher resistance to vibration, shock and temperature
variation than their typical commercial-grade counterparts. |
|
|
|
Wireless Infrastructure. The worldwide market for
wireless LAN infrastructure is projected to grow from
$2.8 billion in 2003 to $4.1 billion in 2007, a
compound annual growth rate of 10%. |
|
|
|
RFID. The worldwide market for RFID is projected to grow
from $1.2 billion in 2003 to $4.4 billion in 2007, a
compound annual growth rate of 35%. |
|
|
|
Mobile Infrastructure Software. The worldwide market for
mobile infrastructure software (mobile middleware, mobile device
management and mobile security) is projected to grow from
$0.9 billion in 2003 to $3.5 billion in 2007, a
compound annual growth rate of 41%. |
Our strengths
We believe that we possess many of the attributes that will be
necessary for long-term success in our industry, including the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
Unique end-to-end enterprise mobility solutions. We are
well positioned in the enterprise mobility market due to our
core technology competencies, our ability to integrate
technology solutions at the platform and systems levels and our
technology and channel resellers and distributors that can
package specific applications to capture, move and manage
information. |
|
|
|
Technology and intellectual property leadership. Our
research and development effort is supported by engineers,
scientists, Ph.D.s and other technical personnel that
comprise approximately 18% of our workforce. Our intellectual
property includes over 825 U.S. patents and over 565
international patents. Our intellectual property and
technological capabilities allow us to create high value
products to deliver unique solutions for our customers. |
|
|
|
A global presence. We have offices in more than 60
countries. For the year ended December 31, 2004, we
generated approximately 28.1% of our revenue from customers in
the Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA) region and
7.4% from the Asia Pacific region. |
|
|
|
Long-term customer relationships and knowledge of vertical
markets. We have a customer-and market-centric orientation
and enjoy long-standing and strong relationships with customers
in each of our target vertical markets. In particular, we have a
long and solid history in providing innovative solutions to the
retail market. We also have significant experience in the
manufacturing, transportation and logistics, wholesale and
distribution, government and healthcare markets. |
|
|
|
A channel-centric and alliance-centric sales model. Our
sales model emphasizes sales through our indirect channel of
value-added resellers and distributors. We believe our sales
model offers us broader penetration across various markets and
enables our internal sales force to focus on building more
effective customer relationships and on satisfying our
customers specific business needs. We believe our
PartnerSelecttm
program, enhances our end-to-end enterprise mobility
architecture with applications, systems integration and
implementations. |
|
|
|
Customer service and support. Our Global Services
Division (GSD) offers our customers an array of
enterprise mobility services ranging from project management to
equipment repair and support. Through GSD, we combine our
extensive technical expertise and vertical market knowledge to
support solutions that increase the value of a customers
information technology investment. |
|
|
|
An experienced management team. We have assembled a
strong and experienced management team with significant
experience in their respective areas of expertise. In addition
to management trained within Symbol, we have recruited a number
of our executives from companies such as Cisco Systems, Inc.,
IBM Corporation, and Agere Systems, Inc. |
2
Our strategy
Our strategy is to deliver to our customers our enterprise
mobility products, solutions and services, which are designed to
increase cost-effectiveness, enhance efficiency and promote
faster execution of critical business processes. We intend to
pursue this goal by applying the following strategies:
|
|
|
|
|
Expand our position in enterprise mobility products and
solutions. We believe our ability to deliver innovative,
end-to-end enterprise mobility systems gives us a competitive
advantage. Accordingly, we plan to continue to invest in product
development, make strategic acquisitions, such as our
acquisition of Matrics, Inc., and enter into alliances to expand
our capabilities in enterprise mobility solutions. |
|
|
|
Target key vertical markets and penetrate new markets. We
intend to expand our presence as a leader in the retail market
beyond traditional activities such as point-of-sale, inventory
and warehouse management, price verification and retail floor
operations to include self-shopping and real-time inventory
visibility. Moreover, we believe we have significant
opportunities to increase our penetration in other vertical
markets in which we participate, such as transportation, parcel
and postal delivery, warehousing, distribution and manufacturing. |
|
|
|
Continue to improve and streamline operations. Over the
past two years, we have restructured and reorganized our major
business functions to improve and streamline our business
processes. As part of our restructuring, we have combined our
product marketing, research and development and product
engineering teams into a single Global Products Group, moving
from a product focus to a customer- and market-centric focus and
have embarked on a program to enhance our core product lines. In
addition, we have taken significant steps to improve our
manufacturing efficiencies by moving the majority of our
manufacturing to lower cost, company-owned and contract
production facilities outside the United States. In addition to
increasing volumes, these steps have helped lower our product
cost of revenue as a percentage of product revenue to 49.5% for
fiscal year 2004 as compared to 51.9% for fiscal year 2003 and
62.9% for fiscal year 2002. We plan to continue to work to
improve and streamline our business processes. |
|
|
|
Build upon our strong foundation of intellectual
property. We intend to continue to invest in research and
development to enable us to continue to offer high quality,
differentiated and cost-effective products to our customers. In
addition, through development and licensing agreements with
third parties, we intend to capitalize on the best of
breed technologies currently in the market and focus our
resources on those areas that provide the most value to our
customers. |
|
|
|
Rationalize product lines and pursue platform-based
products. We believe that pursuing high value-added,
platform-based products will allow us to increase our sales and
margins. For example, on March 31, 2003, we offered 17,012
active product configurations, which we reduced to 5,034 as of
December 31, 2004. |
|
|
|
Expand our sales and channel capabilities. We believe
there are opportunities in each of the geographic regions we
serve, and we intend to expand our sales and channel
capabilities in all of our markets. In the Americas, we will
pursue improved growth with our new sales management team and
better sales coverage both geographically and by vertical market
through our channel resellers and distributors program, Symbol
PartnerSelecttm.
In the EMEA region, we have reorganized our sales operations,
centralized our support functions and expanded our sales
coverage. In the Asia Pacific region, we have new management
developing reseller and distributor relationships, identifying
products with special appeal to that geography and focusing
sales resources on the most promising markets. |
RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
|
|
|
Management and board of directors changes and other
remedial actions resulting from accounting misconduct by our
former management |
Beginning in May 2001, we began a series of internal
investigations with respect to certain accounting matters,
principally concerning the timing and amount of revenue
recognized during the period from
3
January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2001, as well as the
accounting for certain reserves, restructurings, certain option
programs and several categories of cost of revenue and operating
expenses. The United States Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) and the United States Attorneys Office
for the Eastern District of New York (Eastern
District) commenced separate but related investigations.
These investigations led to the resignation of, and the filing
of criminal indictments against, several of our former senior
executives, including Tomo Razmilovic, one of our former
Presidents, Chief Executive Officers and directors, and Kenneth
Jaeggi, our former Senior Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer, and the restatement of certain of our previously filed
financial statements. Robert Asti, our former Vice
President North America Sales and
Service Finance, Robert Korkuc, our former Chief
Accounting Officer and Brian Burke, a former Senior Vice
President of Worldwide Operations and a former Chief Accounting
Officer, have pled guilty to two counts of securities fraud in
connection with the government investigations described above
and four of our former employees, including Leonard Goldner, our
former Executive Vice President and General Counsel, have pled
guilty to various conspiracy charges. Indictments are still
pending in the Eastern District against Tomo Razmilovic and five
other members of our former management, and complaints have been
filed by the SEC against eleven members of our former management
for securities fraud and other violations of the federal
securities laws.
On June 3, 2004, we announced that we resolved the
investigation by the Eastern District by entering into a
non-prosecution agreement with the Eastern District. As a result
of this non-prosecution agreement, no criminal complaint will be
filed against us by the Eastern District. On that date, we also
announced an agreement with the SEC that resolved the
investigation being conducted by the SEC. Pursuant to the
agreements with the Eastern District and the SEC, we have paid
$37 million in cash to a restitution fund for members of
the class consisting of purchasers of our common stock from
February 15, 2000 to October 17, 2002 and
$3 million to the United States Postal Inspection Service
Consumer Fraud Fund. In addition to these payments, we have
acknowledged responsibility for previous misconduct by certain
of our former employees and agreed to continue our cooperation
with the Eastern District and the SEC, have retained an
independent, government-approved examiner to review our internal
controls, financial reporting practices and our compliance with
the settlement agreements and established and maintain an annual
training and education program designed to diminish the
possibility of future violations of the federal securities laws.
Pursuant to the agreement with the SEC, the SEC filed, and the
court has approved, a Final Consent Judgment in the Eastern
District of New York providing for injunctive relief, enjoining
us from further violations of the antifraud, reporting, books
and records and internal control provisions of the federal
securities laws, and a civil penalty in the amount of
$37 million, as described above. For more information on
the Eastern District and SEC investigations, see
Item 3. Legal Proceedings Government
investigations.
In addition to the resolution of the investigations by the SEC
and the Eastern District, we have resolved three class action
lawsuits that alleged violations of federal securities laws,
including allegations that we issued materially false and
misleading statements that had the effect of artificially
inflating the market price of our common stock. Under the
settlement, we agreed to pay to the class members an aggregate
of $1.75 million in cash and to issue an aggregate number
of shares of common stock equal to a market value of
$96.25 million, subject to a minimum and maximum number of
shares as set forth in the settlement agreement. The court held
a fairness hearing regarding the settlement on October 4,
2004 and approved the fairness of the settlement by an order
entered on October 20, 2004. On November 17, 2004, we
delivered 586,533 shares, or 10% of the settlement amount
(at $16.41 per share), as satisfaction of the
plaintiffs attorneys fees, pursuant to the
courts order. We expect to deliver the balance of the
shares required to be issued under the settlement in the first
half of 2005. For more information, see Item 3.
Legal Proceedings Securities litigation
matters.
In response to the investigations by the SEC and the Eastern
District, our board of directors assembled a new senior
management team. Since mid-2002, we replaced 31% of management
with job titles of director and above and appointed
the following individuals:
|
|
|
|
|
William R. Nuti, President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
(formerly Senior Vice President of Cisco Systems, Inc.); |
4
|
|
|
|
|
Todd Abbott, Senior Vice President Worldwide
Operations (formerly Group Vice President of EMEA Service
Provider Sales of Cisco Systems, Inc.); |
|
|
|
Mark T. Greenquist, Senior Vice President Finance
and Chief Financial Officer (formerly Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer of Agere Systems, Inc.); |
|
|
|
Peter M. Lieb, Senior Vice President, General Counsel and
Secretary (formerly Deputy General Counsel of International
Paper Company); and |
|
|
|
James M. Conboy, Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting
Officer (formerly a director of D.P. Healy CPA, P.C., a
forensic accounting firm). |
Since mid-2002, we have also appointed five new independent
members to our board of directors, none of whom has a prior
association with our former senior management, including:
|
|
|
|
|
Salvatore Iannuzzi, Chairman (formerly Chief Administrative
Officer of CIBC World Markets, Inc.); |
|
|
|
Robert J. Chrenc (formerly Executive Vice President and Chief
Administrative Officer of ACNielsen); |
|
|
|
Edward Kozel (formerly a Managing Director of Integrated Finance
Ltd., an advisory firm); |
|
|
|
George Samenuk (Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of McAfee,
Inc.); and |
|
|
|
Melvin A. Yellin (President of Stone Point Corporation, an
advisory firm that concentrates on risk management and corporate
governance issues). |
In 2003 and 2004, we have implemented and continue to implement
various initiatives, conducted with the oversight of our audit
committee, to address the material weaknesses and deficiencies
in our internal controls identified by our prior auditors and
our own internal investigations. These initiatives, along with
the initiatives related to our compliance with the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, address our control environment,
organization and staffing, policies, procedures, documentation
and information systems and are intended to continuously improve
our internal controls and procedures, address systems and
personnel issues and help ensure a corporate culture that
emphasizes integrity, honesty and accurate financial reporting.
In November 2004, during our inventory testing (including a
planned physical inventory at a company-owned distribution
center), two unrelated errors were discovered. These errors were
the result of two discrete events. One event involved inaccurate
inventory levels reported to us by a large distribution partner.
The second discrepancy was the result of errors that occurred at
a company-owned distribution facility that serves one of our
large retail customers. Based on these findings, management
believed there were significant deficiencies relating to its
controls for receiving, shipping and ultimately reporting the
amount of inventory. The errors reported as described above led
to (i) an overstatement of our revenues in our earnings
release on October 26, 2004 for the three- and nine- month
periods ended September 30, 2004 and (ii) the delay,
but timely, filing of our report on Form 10-Q as of and for
the three- and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2004.
Since the discovery of the significant deficiencies in November
2004 as described above, we have taken steps to ensure that the
financial results for the fiscal year ending December 31,
2004 are fairly presented in all material respects. We have also
taken various measures to improve the effectiveness of our
internal controls.
The non-prosecution agreement between the Company and the United
States Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of New
York, described previously, provides that should the Company
violate the agreement or commit a crime in the future, the
Company would be subject to prosecution for any offense,
including any offense related to the Companys past
accounting practices. The Company has retained outside counsel
to investigate the facts and circumstances surrounding the
erroneous numbers included in the October 26, 2004 press
release and to assist with responding to requests made by the
Eastern District and the SEC regarding this matter, including
whether Symbol has complied with the injunction entered into in
connection with its
5
June 2004 settlement with the SEC and non-prosecution agreement
with the Eastern District. There can be no assurance that these
events will not give rise to an enforcement action or other
proceeding brought by the Eastern District or the SEC.
On September 9, 2004, we acquired privately held Matrics,
Inc. (Matrics) for $230 million in cash. We
financed the acquisition of Matrics with a portion of a
$250 million borrowing under a short-term credit facility,
which was refinanced on December 29, 2004 with our new
credit facility (see below). See Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations Existing
indebtedness.
Based in Rockville, Maryland, Matrics was a leader in developing
Electronic Product Code (EPC)-compliant RFID
systems. RFID is a next generation data capture technology that
utilizes small tags attached to products or assets that emit
radio signals that can be read at a distance. This allows for
remote reading device of information relevant to the asset,
similar to that contained in bar codes. Because RFID does not
require physical contact between the reader and the tag, or even
a line of sight, it provides the ability to capture more data
more efficiently and is beneficial in areas such as supply chain
management, asset tracking and security.
Matrics has focused its strategic RFID solutions efforts on
Electronic Product Code standards, which are the emerging global
RFID standards. Matrics has developed EPC-compliant RFID systems
for retail, defense, transportation and other vertical markets.
The Matrics product portfolio features RFID systems including
multi-protocol, EPC-compliant fixed readers; readers designed
for embedded applications, such as RFID printers and mobile
computers; high-performance antennas for RFID tag reading; and
EPC labels that can be attached to items such as containers,
pallets, cartons and more. The RFID tag family includes both
read-only and read/write functionality that addresses a wide
range of asset visibility applications. Matrics is also
developing a proprietary manufacturing process that is expected
to provide for higher volume and more cost effective
manufacturing of tags.
We believe the acquisition of Matrics is an important step in
executing our plan to be a leader in RFID, and will expand our
offerings in the advanced data capture industry. Prior to the
acquisition of Matrics, we had been internally developing a
handheld RFID reader and a services and support business focused
on the deployment of RFID systems. Our revenues from our
internal RFID business were insignificant. The Matrics
acquisition has allowed us to offer complete RFID systems by
adding commercially ready fixed RFID reader systems and tag
products to our current offerings. We believe RFID technology is
a new generation of advanced data capture and is complementary
to our offering of bar code scanners and rugged handheld
computers.
The acquisition of Matrics had a $26.8 million negative
impact on our year ended December 31, 2004 net
earnings and a $0.11 negative impact on earnings per share,
primarily as a result of a $12.8 million write-off of
in-process research and development costs, the interest expense
and amortization of fees associated with the short-term credit
facility used to fund the acquisition and the refinancing
thereof with the new credit facility on December 29, 2004.
We paid a significant premium for Matrics, and thus allocated a
significant portion of the purchase price to goodwill, because
we believe that EPC-based technology will be a material area of
investment for our customers in our retail, manufacturing,
transportation and logistics, wholesale distribution, healthcare
and government vertical markets. We believe that Matrics is an
early market leader with its commercial tag and reader products
based on its trial deployments and full implementations with its
customers in retail, transportation, healthcare, and government
vertical markets. The RFID market is at the early stages of
development. However we currently believe that the costs we will
incur during the product life cycle for both existing technology
and future, replacement, RFID technology will be consistent with
the expenditures we have incurred in developing and maintaining
our existing enterprise mobility solutions. Our goal is to
obtain a significant share of the market by combining our
expertise in sales and support for enterprise mobility solutions
6
along with our engineering resources and Matrics expertise
in this emerging market, which is a market that is projected to
grow rapidly in the next three to five years.
If we are unable to develop or enhance the Matrics technology
within the timeframe outlined, we may not meet our revenue and
profitability projections. Furthermore, we believe that a number
of our existing customers intend to deploy RFID systems
utilizing technology such as that provided by Matrics and if we
fail to deliver those products, those customers may be less
willing to purchase our other existing products, further
negatively impacting revenue and profitability. If we do not
develop or enhance the Matrics technology in line with our
projections, we may be required to incur higher than expected
operating and capital expenses in order to address these issues
and meet projections.
On December 29, 2004, we entered into our new credit
facility (i) to repay in full our outstanding senior
indebtedness, comprised of the short-term credit facility and
our prior revolving credit facility, dated as of
November 17, 2003; (ii) for working capital and
general corporate purposes; and (iii) to pay certain fees
and expenses incurred in connection with such transactions.
Pursuant to our new credit facility, the lenders severally
agreed to provide us the following: (a) a senior secured
term loan facility in an aggregate principal amount of
$100 million and (b) a senior secured revolving credit
facility in an aggregate principal amount of up to
$150 million with a $20 million sublimit available for
letters of credit. Our new credit facility is secured on a first
priority basis by (i) a pledge of all of the capital stock
or other equity interests of our domestic subsidiaries,
(ii) a pledge of 65% of the capital stock or other equity
interests of selected overseas subsidiaries located in the
United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Japan, (iii) 100% of
the capital stock of the manufacturing entity in Reynosa, Mexico
and all of its other assets and (iv) all our other domestic
assets (other than real estate) and the stock of our domestic
subsidiaries. On December 29, 2004, we borrowed
$100 million under the term loan facility and
$100 million under the revolving credit facility. For
more information regarding the new credit facility, see
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Existing indebtedness.
|
|
|
Compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 |
On June 5, 2003, the SEC issued new rules on internal
control over financial reporting that were mandated by
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(Section 404). These new rules require
management to report on the effectiveness of the Companys
internal control over financial reporting. We employed the
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission to evaluate the effectiveness of the Companys
internal control over financial reporting. Our management has
assessed the Companys internal control over financial
reporting to be effective as of December 31, 2004.
Additionally, our independent auditor, Ernst & Young
LLP, has attested to our evaluation and compliance with
Section 404. See Item 9A. Controls and
Procedures Managements Report on Internal
Control over Financial Reporting.
PRODUCT SEGMENT
Our products and solutions are designed to capture, move and
manage information in real time to and from the point of
business activity:
|
|
|
|
|
Capture. Our advanced data capture products fall into
three categories: (1) handheld and hands-free laser bar
code scanners, imagers and kiosks; (2) enterprise mobile
computing systems, including rugged handheld,
wearable and vehicle-mounted mobile computers and durable
personal digital assistants; and (3) RFID infrastructure
and tags. |
|
|
|
Move. We offer mobility infrastructure solutions that
provide wireless local area networks (wireless LAN)
connectivity. Our mobility devices also offer support for
wireless LAN, wireless wide area networks (wireless
WAN), personal area wireless networks and complementary
standards and technologies, including
Bluetoothtm,
WiFi, CDMA, GSM/ GPRS. |
7
|
|
|
|
|
Manage. Our Mobility Services Platform (MSP)
is a suite of software products that includes our MSP Server and
our MSP Studio, which are designed to enhance the performance,
efficiency and productivity of mobility solutions. |
The Global Products Group is comprised of the following five
divisions:
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile Computing Division; |
|
|
|
Advanced Data Capture Division; |
|
|
|
Wireless Infrastructure Division; |
|
|
|
RFID Division; and |
|
|
|
Mobility Software Division. |
For the year ended December 31, 2004, Product Segment net
revenue was $1,433.7 million, which represented
82.8 percent of our total revenues. Our MSP was announced
in May 2004, but was not available for shipping until the fourth
quarter of 2004. For the year ended December 31, 2004,
revenues from sales of our MSP products were immaterial. See
Note 18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included
elsewhere herein.
Mobile Computing Division
Our portfolio of mobile computing products includes durable,
lightweight, battery-powered handheld computers and
vehicle-mounted computers. Our newest designs are primarily
based on industry-standard processors and industry-standard
Microsoft® and Palm® handheld operating systems.
Information is captured by a bar code reader, RFID reader,
microphone or manual entry via a keyboard or touch screen on a
pen computer display/data entry device. The information
collected by the mobile computing device is then transmitted
across
Bluetoothtm
personal area wireless networks, wireless LAN and/or wireless
WAN, or via an offline batch file transfer. More than 95% of our
mobile computing devices are shipped with an integrated bar code
reader and approximately 90% offer optional integrated wireless
LAN or wireless WAN communication capability.
Our rugged mobile computers are primarily used in business or
industrial environments, and we design our devices to be modular
and customizable to customer requirements. Our mobile computing
product line includes several different rugged mobile computing
models, many of which include multiple configurations for each
model. For the year ended December 31, 2004, revenue from
our mobile computing division accounted for 61.8% of our total
product revenue.
|
|
|
Product and technology information |
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Digital Assistant (EDA). In early
2005, we introduced the Symbol MC50, an enterprise-class
handheld computer. The Symbol MC50 handheld computer is a secure
and manageable EDA that is designed for mobile managers in the
retail market and in other market segments that require
in-building mobile field force automation applications to
maintain productivity, efficiency and enterprise connectivity. |
|
|
|
SPT Series. The SPT1800 is a Palm
Poweredtm
handheld device that features bar code data capture capability
and wireless LAN or wireless WAN connectivity. This family of
products is designed for point-of-activity information
management and is used in office workflow automation, route
accounting, healthcare, education, retail, industrial and
warehouse settings. |
|
|
|
PPT Series. Our PPT series is a family of Pocket PC-based
mobile computers that includes bar code scanning and real-time
wireless communication options. The PPT8800 slim handheld, based
upon the Microsoft Windows CE 4.1 (also known as CE.NET)
operating system, provides customers with laser bar code
scanning, ruggedization and wireless LAN connectivity. Its
smaller streamlined size enables it |
8
|
|
|
|
|
to extend into new enterprise applications such as mobile
shopping, mobile point-of-sale and mobile SAP access. The
PPT8800 is also offered with the option for
Bluetoothtmwireless
connectivity. |
|
|
|
MC3000 Series. In January 2005, we introduced the MC3000.
The MC3000 handheld is a small, lightweight, highly ergonomic,
rugged mobile computer targeting the retail and transportation
and logistics industries and designed for in-store and backroom
data capture applications. The MC3000 provides a migration path
to move from a legacy DOS-based application environment to the
Microsoft Windows CE .NET 4.2 computing platform for those
customers seeking to upgrade aging systems to support their
competitive initiatives. |
|
|
|
MC9000 Series. In November 2003, we introduced the MC9000
mobile computing family. A recent addition to our mobile
computing product portfolio delivers application-specific
mobility tools in three different models: the grip form factor
MC9000-G for scan-intensive applications; the handheld MC9000-K
for mobile applications outside the enterprise; and the handheld
MC9000-S for mobile field applications. |
Advanced Data Capture Division
Enterprise mobility requires the ability to capture data in real
time at the point of business activity. Our advanced data
capture solutions allow users to gather product or asset
specific information from retail points-of-sale and along the
supply chain in distribution centers, warehouses and
manufacturing plants. Our bar code scanners are designed for
power, performance and durability and are contained in an
ergonomically designed housing in most data capture
environments. In addition, our advanced data capture devices
have 1-D and 2-D scanning capabilities, which read both existing
standard Universal Product Code/ European Article Number
bar codes as well as emerging RSS (reduced space symbology),
DataMatrix and Universal Container Code composite codes. For the
year ended December 31, 2004, revenue from our advanced
data capture division accounted for 28.4% of our total Product
Segment revenue.
|
|
|
Product and technology information |
|
|
|
|
|
Handheld Scanners. We offer customers a variety of
handheld scanner designs, configurations and product features.
We recently introduced our new long-range industrial scanner
line, the LS 3408 family of advanced data capture products that
offer scanning from distances of up to 45 feet. These
scanners are targeted for inventory and asset management
applications in the manufacturing and warehousing segments. |
|
|
|
Hands-Free and Fixed Mount Scanners. We offer a line of
miniaturized slot scanner products, which are designed to
accommodate on counter and in counter
applications. We also offer laser diode-based projection
scanners that provide customers with more advanced scanning
capability. This enables a user to quickly capture bar code data
regardless of how the bar code is presented to the scanner. It
also allows the scanner to read poorly printed bar codes faster
and more accurately. |
|
|
|
Scan and Imaging Engines. We introduced our first line of
scan engines in 1990 and continue to offer an array of laser
scanning and imaging engines. We also offer MiniScan module
products that can be easily used as industrial fixed-mount or
embedded scanners. This feature offers flexibility in
applications such as information kiosks, ATMs, warehousing and
manufacturing assembly lines, conveyer belts, clinical
diagnostic equipment, gas pumps, robotic arms and authorization
and identification for security purposes. |
|
|
|
Self-Scanning and Self-Checkout. Our self-scanning and
self-checkout products are utilized in retail venues throughout
the world in order to increase customer traffic and worker
productivity. Our automated customer self-service device
provides customers with the ability to check the price of
merchandise, retrieve product information and obtain real-time
information on in-store and frequent shopper promotions. Our
acquisition of @pos in 2002 included signature-capture terminals
and payment transaction terminals. |
9
|
|
|
|
|
Wearable Scanners. We were one of the first companies to
introduce a wearable scanning system that allows users wireless
LAN connectivity, hands-free bar code scanning and information
collection. The primary markets for our wearable scanners
include transportation and logistics and wholesale and
distribution vertical markets. |
Wireless Infrastructure Division
We develop, design and provide wireless networking solutions
that connect mobile computing devices and bar code reading
equipment to enterprise networks. Based on industry-standard
IEEE 802.11 and related technologies, our wireless networking
products provide real-time wireless data communication and voice
communication. The focus of the division is the design and
development of wireless network client and infrastructure
solutions for the enterprise and highly mobile transaction
processing systems market. For the year ended December 31,
2004, revenue from our wireless infrastructure division
accounted for 10.5% of total Product Segment revenue.
|
|
|
Product and technology information |
|
|
|
|
|
Enterprise Class Access Points (APs). We
were one of the first companies to introduce a wireless LAN
product that operated in the 2.4 GHz frequency-band. We
support the IEEE 802.11 Wi-Fi standards for data transmission,
which provides users with high-speed wireless capabilities for
rapid data transfer from server to terminal, image transfer,
Internet communications, customer self-scanning services and
streaming video. We also offer the AP3021 (IEEE 802.11 Frequency
Hopping) and AP 4131 (IEEE 802.11 Wi-Fi) enterprise class access
points. |
|
|
|
Wireless Switch Products. Our wireless switch products
allow businesses to manage their wireless networks from a
centralized location. We pioneered the wireless switch model
that includes thin access ports, which gives
businesses the flexibility to grow their networks by adding
access ports as needed. |
|
|
|
|
|
WS5100: The WS5100 Wireless Switch is our second
generation wireless switch system developed to integrate with
existing enterprise infrastructure and clients from several
equipment vendors. Its design allows for existing and emerging
wireless paths to allow legacy access points to become
integrated to the wireless switch system. Symbols WS5000
was our first generation Wireless Switch solution. |
|
|
|
WS2000: The WS2000 Wireless Switch is an integrated,
centralized wired and wireless networking solution designed and
priced for small to medium enterprises and branch offices. |
|
|
|
|
|
Wireless Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP).
We are incorporating voice technology into our mobile computing
devices and wireless infrastructure. This technology includes
walkie-talkie mode over Wi-Fi and the ability to make voice
calls over enterprise IP data networks (VoIP telephony). |
|
|
|
Client Products. Our first Wi-Fi certified IEEE 802.11
CompactFlash wireless LAN adapter card delivers Wi-Fi wireless
connectivity to PDAs. It can be used with handheld devices
running
Microsoft®Windowstm
for Pocket PC, and supports numerous configurations of notebook
computers. |
RFID Division
We develop, design and provide RFID data capture solutions. RFID
is a next generation data capture technology utilizing small
tags that emit radio signals. RFID tags, attached to products or
assets, enable remote reading of information relevant to the
asset, similar to the data contained in a bar code. Because RFID
does not require physical contact between the reading device and
the tag, or even a line of sight, it provides the ability to
capture more data more efficiently and is beneficial in areas
such as supply chain management, asset tracking and security.
10
We believe that the acquisition of Matrics is an important step
in executing our plan to be a leader in the RFID market and
allows us to offer our customers additional advanced data
capture solutions. We believe that in order for RFID to be
deployed successfully, it needs to be deployed as a system that
allows customers to capture, move and manage critical
information to and from the point of business activity. By
incorporating the Matrics Electronic Product Code
(EPC)-compliant RFID products into our portfolio of
mobile computing, advanced data capture and wireless
technologies, we believe we can help customers in key market
segments expand from bar code based systems to enterprisewide
RFID deployments.
The Matrics technology is designed to be compatible with key
existing RFID standards, as well as anticipated next generation
RFID standards under development. We believe that our RFID
solutions will be compliant with any technology ultimately
adopted as an industry standard.
|
|
|
Product and technology information |
|
|
|
|
|
RFID Tags. We design, manufacture and provide a product
suite of RFID tags for a range of RFID applications. We believe
our tags produce high application performance through advanced
design and stringent manufacturing. For example, our patented
dual-dipole design allows tags to be read at different
orientations, which is a critical factor required to achieve
reliable read rates. |
|
|
|
RFID Reader Infrastructure. We provide a line of fixed
readers and infrastructure solutions. Our products include the
AR400, an EPC-compliant multi-protocol fixed reader for shipping
and receiving dock-doors and conveyer belts, and an
industrial-strength EPC-compliant reader for embedded
applications, such as printers and mobile computers. Our reader
infrastructure also offers networking and management
capabilities to help reduce the complexity of large-scale
deployments. |
|
|
|
Mobile RFID Reader. We also offer customers a mobile RFID
reader. The rugged MC9000G mobile computer is an EPC-compliant
RFID reader that is suitable for a broad range of applications.
These reader products give organizations real-time access to
mission-critical information from key points in their supply
chain. |
Mobility Software Division
Important to enterprise mobility are centralized mobility
management solutions that reduce the risk and complexity
associated with mobile deployments. These systems provide the
basis for rapid development, deployment, management, support and
control of mobile devices. At the same time, mobility management
also enables operations and IT groups to contain support costs
and maintain complete, real-time visibility into the performance
of the enterprise mobility systems.
Our mobile infrastructure software division is focusing its
efforts on developing next-generation platform technologies and
solution strategies. Our Mobility Services Platform is a
scalable and integrated software suite, which ties together our
mobile clients, wireless switch/infrastructure and back-end
applications and databases. Our MSP was announced in May 2004
and was available for shipping in the fourth quarter of 2004.
Revenue from sales of our MSP products was immaterial in the
year ended December 31, 2004. We believe our MSP will
provide additional future revenue without materially affecting
our business operations. We expect to incur additional capital
investment costs relating to MSP at levels consistent with our
other existing products.
|
|
|
Product and technology information |
|
|
|
|
|
Mobility Services Platform: Our Mobility Services
Platform is designed to be delivered through our MSP Server,
which is a rack-mounted appliance with a web-based console that
includes wireless network management and mobile device
management capabilities such as configuration, provisioning,
monitoring, charting, reporting and troubleshooting. Our MSP
Server provides customers with control and visibility of their
entire enterprise mobility system, including mobile devices,
mobile applications and wireless network infrastructure. We
believe that our MSP Server permits our customers to |
11
|
|
|
|
|
accelerate the introduction of their enterprise mobility
solutions, promote better performance and quality of service,
and reduce the complexity and total cost of ownership of their
enterprise mobility systems. |
Our MSP Server provides the following functionalities:
|
|
|
|
|
remote, rapid and secure configuration of mobile devices over
any IP network and the provision of the correct software and
applications to these devices; |
|
|
|
provisioning of mobile devices and wireless network elements; |
|
|
|
visibility into performance data across mobile devices, mobile
applications and wireless networks and monitoring of several
hundred mobile devices and wireless network element
characteristics; |
|
|
|
ability to save data and events into a database that is then
used to provide real-time device monitoring; and |
|
|
|
rapid diagnosis and resolution of network, device and
application problems. |
|
|
|
Software and Programming Tools. Our MSP Studio is a suite
of software programming tools that helps application developers
save development costs and launch mobile solutions faster than
custom coding and point solutions. Using the MSP Studio,
companies can build mobile applications for a single device and
replicate the applications to other devices across an
organization with minimal effort. |
SERVICES SEGMENT
The Global Services Division (GSD), our global
services organization, offers our customers an array of services
from system planning and design for emerging technologies to
comprehensive product maintenance and support. Our services are
marketed under the Symbol Enterprise Mobility Services brand and
are sold and delivered via our global direct sales and services
organization and through our Symbol
PartnerSelecttm
and
SymbolCertifiedtm
Professional Services certification programs. For the year ended
December 31, 2004, Services Segment net revenue was
$298.5 million, which represented 17.2 percent of
total revenues. See Note 18 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements included elsewhere herein.
|
|
|
Symbol Enterprise Mobility Services |
Symbol Enterprise Mobility Services is comprised of the
following three integrated service elements:
|
|
|
|
|
Mobility Services. Our Mobility Services organization
provides customers access to vertical market knowledge and
expertise in designing and deploying mobility solutions on a
global basis. Customers also gain access to emerging mobility
technologies as services are developed, tested and proven. Once
these emerging technology solutions are tested and standardized,
they are transitioned to our
SymbolCertifiedtm
Professional Services Providers for implementation. |
|
|
|
SymbolCertifiedtm
Professional Services. Our
SymbolCertifiedtm
Professional Services Providers offer installation and
implementation services for mainstream mobility systems, devices
and applications. We certify our providers through a rigorous
process and oversee and impose on them quality standards to
ensure that our customers receive the level and quality of
implementation and installation support required. |
|
|
|
Customer Services. Our Customer Services organization
delivers global repair capabilities to our customers. We provide
service and support on-site as well as through our service
centers. Our service centers provide maintenance and repair
services and offer a single repair point for both Symbol and
selected third-party products. Our customer service operations
for the Americas include a facility operated jointly in
El Paso, Texas and Juarez, Mexico. In 2004, we opened an
approximately 102,000 square-foot Shared Services
Centre in Brno, South Moravia in the Czech Republic to |
12
|
|
|
|
|
service our customers in the EMEA region. We are in the process
of establishing service capability in the Asia Pacific region. |
OUR VERTICAL MARKETS
We target the following six vertical market segments:
|
|
|
|
|
retail; |
|
|
|
transportation and logistics; |
|
|
|
manufacturing; |
|
|
|
wholesale and distribution; |
|
|
|
government; and |
|
|
|
healthcare. |
RETAIL
Our products help retailers control inventory flow, combine
in-store and back office solutions to enhance productivity and
track customer purchasing patterns for pinpoint marketing. We
also provide industry-specific solutions across retail segments
including customer-facing technology to increase customer
loyalty, retention and sales. Examples of our solutions in the
retail sector include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
wireless handheld scanners that enable cashiers at home
improvement stores with scanning large, bulky items; |
|
|
|
mobile handheld computers that contain bar code scanners and
imagers that interface with wireless networks and software
applications for order entry, price management and other
in-store tasks; |
|
|
|
kiosks that enable customers to self-scan items to verify prices
and participate in gift registries; and |
|
|
|
the Symbol Portable Shopping
Systemtm,
which allows customers to scan purchases as they shop with
lightweight, ergonomic handheld devices, giving them product
data, a running total of their purchases, targeted promotional
offers and access to other customer services. |
TRANSPORTATION AND LOGISTICS
Our transportation and logistics mobility solutions are designed
to enable transportation and logistics companies to manage
inventory in motion, improve pick-up and delivery planning,
improve turnaround times, drive more stops per trip to lower
fleet and driver requirements, improve margins by lowering
operating costs and enhance regulatory compliance. Examples of
our solutions in the transportation and logistics sector include
the following:
|
|
|
|
|
systems to provide detailed, real-time information about fleet
and delivery activities to provide greater control of
transportation resources and to improve visibility into
shipments; |
|
|
|
in-vehicle systems that capture and transmit real-time
information on driver performance, routes taken and hours worked; |
|
|
|
handheld computers that capture pick-up and delivery information
and transmit data to a central computer so that inventory is
optimally assigned to the appropriate transportation asset; |
|
|
|
mobile computers to permit workers to receive delivery schedules
when the driver is ready to depart; |
13
|
|
|
|
|
handheld systems to allow drivers to print delivery confirmation
slips for customers at the point-of-delivery and instantly send
data messages such as service completions or receive new pick-up
assignments; and |
|
|
|
wireless ring scanners to read bar codes on packages passing on
a conveyer belt, affording hands-free sorting in the routing of
parcels and packages. |
MANUFACTURING
Our solutions are designed to enable manufacturers to capture
and transmit data electronically, improve efficiency and assist
in just-in-time manufacturing processes. Moreover,
point-of-activity solutions from us and our resellers and
distributors are a critical component in Enterprise Resource
Planning systems. We believe our solutions lead to better
informed decisions by capturing data in real time and linking
seamlessly to middleware and enterprise planning suites from
major providers. Examples of our solutions in manufacturing
include:
|
|
|
|
|
rugged, mobile data-capture devices for incoming inspections and
collection and monitoring of data on assembly lines to help
track work in progress, monitor quality, manage materials and
inventory and provide quality assurance; |
|
|
|
wireless LAN systems to connect engineering resources to the
shop floor, shipping to receiving, plants to each other,
suppliers and customers to the plant, the entire operation to
the front office, and enterprisewide manufacturing systems to
the Internet; and |
|
|
|
wireless mobile computers and wireless LAN infrastructure to
capture information on the warehouse floor and move the
inventory data into databases to facilitate better financial
management, inventory control and tracking of customer orders. |
WHOLESALE AND DISTRIBUTION
Our solutions are designed to help distributors track inventory,
reduce errors, improve productivity and increase asset
visibility. As a result, distributors are enabled to reduce
their order fulfillment cycle to increase speed to market in a
more cost-efficient manner. Examples of our solutions in the
wholesale and distribution sector include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
handheld mobile computers to scan products upon arrival at the
warehouse and direct workers through their daily tasks of moving
inventory throughout the facility; |
|
|
|
wireless mobile computers and wireless LAN infrastructure to
manage the movement of people, products and information on the
warehouse floor and communicate critical data to systems to
provide visibility to and simplify execution of customer orders; |
|
|
|
handheld computers certified by U.S. and European
standardization agencies for electronics as intrinsically
safe for use in hazardous areas; and |
|
|
|
hands-free mobile computers to permit warehouse operators to use
both hands to perform warehouse receiving and picking tasks
while scanning bar code data. |
GOVERNMENT
Our solutions are designed to help government agencies operate
more efficiently and effectively, generate and capture revenue
and better serve their constituents. Examples of our solutions
in the government sector include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
mobile computers and portable printers for use in parking
enforcement; |
|
|
|
mobile computers for use by police officers on patrol to collect
and communicate vital data from accident sites, roadside vehicle
inspection sites and crime scenes; |
14
|
|
|
|
|
wireless networks, handheld computers and bar code scanners that
serve as building blocks for public safety and security
applications; |
|
|
|
RFID-enabled mobile computers to track shipping containers as
they move across borders; and |
|
|
|
scanners used in correctional facilities to manage the movement
of prison inmates from facility to facility, manage access to
phones, track activities and register release dates. |
HEALTHCARE
Our products are used by healthcare solution providers to enable
healthcare professionals to work more productively, obtain
real-time access to the latest patient data in order to prevent
medical errors and improve the level of patient care. Our
products help meet the recent requirement by the United States
Food and Drug Administration that pharmaceutical companies apply
bar codes to thousands of single-dosage prescription and
over-the-counter drugs dispensed in hospitals and clinics.
Examples of our products used as part of solutions in the
healthcare sector include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
wireless mobile computers to read encoded information on a
patients wristband and on the drug packaging to verify
that the patient is receiving the correct medication; |
|
|
|
handheld mobile computers with bar code-reading capability to
help prioritize patients, view lab reports and capture vital
signs and other documentation; and |
|
|
|
wireless applications to permit doctors and nurses to remotely
monitor a patients vital signs and program a
patients monitor and infusion pumps. |
SALES AND MARKETING
We market our products domestically and internationally through
a variety of distribution channels, including a direct sales
force, original equipment manufacturers, solution providers
(SPs), authorized resellers (ARs) and
distributors. SPs and ARs integrate and sell our products to
customers while also selling to those customers other products
or services not provided by us. Our sales organization includes
offices located throughout the United States and in Argentina,
Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, Denmark,
Dubai, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, India, Japan,
Mexico, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia,
Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland
and the United Kingdom.
We have contractual relationships and strategic alliances with
unaffiliated resellers and distributors. Through these
relationships, we are able to broaden our distribution network
and participate in industries other than those serviced by our
direct sales force and distributors. For example, in 2004 we
entered into a strategic alliance with AT&T Wireless,
through which AT&T Wireless and Symbol will jointly sell and
market AT&T Wireless voice and data services for some of our
mobile computing products in order to provide customers with
real-time enterprise mobility. In 2004, we agreed to jointly
develop and co-market with Nextel Communications, Inc.
(Nextel) voice and data mobility solutions to help
business customers reduce operating costs, increase workforce
productivity and drive operational efficiencies. The
Symbol-Nextel mobile solutions for vertical field service and
sales workers will be targeted across many industry segments,
including transportation and distribution, public safety,
retail, manufacturing, healthcare, utilities and
telecommunications.
In 2003, we increased our focus on our reseller channel strategy
and initiated our
PartnerSelecttm
program, which is designed to enhance the capabilities of our
resellers and distributors and our relationships with them. We
believe that this program has significantly contributed to the
increase of orders through our resellers and distributors from
approximately 46% of our total product orders for the year ended
2002 to approximately 74% of our total product orders as of
December 31, 2004. Our goal is to have up to 84% of our
products ordered through these resellers and distributors. We
have been recognized by VARBusiness magazine as one of North
Americas top information technology vendors for the
breadth and depth of our channel reseller and distributor
program offerings.
15
We believe our focus on reseller channel strategy and the
PartnerSelecttm
Program will allow us to leverage our SG&A cost structure
over time without materially impacting our gross margins. With
respect to SG&A, we believe we are able to benefit from our
channel leveraged cost structure for distribution. The benefits
to our cost structure of leveraging our channel for distribution
are related to two areas. First, our channel reduces the amount
of overhead we require to sell and distribute our products by
acting as an aggregation point. Second, the distribution channel
allows us to reduce fluctuations in our selling prices by
pricing products into the channel at a consistent rate and
allowing the distribution channel to absorb any price changes in
our sales to the end user customer. This allows for more
reliable gross margin performance which as a result allows
Symbol to focus on cost reduction and efficiency in its supply
chain and distribution processes.
We also believe our channel sales force allows us to increase
revenues by extending our supply to meet demand in market
segments to which our direct sales force does not sell.
Resellers and distributors each have their own sales
organizations which in many cases complement Symbols sales
organization in their coverage of potential customers of our
products. Additionally, resellers and distributors often pursue
sales that have lower total revenue potential, and thus might
not be covered by our direct sales force. Finally, in many cases
resellers have deep expertise with specific applications or a
specific customers operations that allow them to be
effective in selling Symbols products. As a result, we
believe our distribution model helps us meet our goal of
maintaining our gross margin over time, as we obtain scale from
shipping more efficiently through better management of our
supply chain.
The following table sets forth certain information as to
international revenues of
Symbol(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In millions) | |
Area
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EMEA(2)
|
|
$ |
487.2 |
|
|
$ |
438.6 |
|
|
$ |
382.8 |
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
128.7 |
|
|
|
112.6 |
|
|
|
84.6 |
|
Other(3)
|
|
|
87.7 |
|
|
|
92.9 |
|
|
|
75.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
703.6 |
|
|
$ |
644.1 |
|
|
$ |
542.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
See Note 18 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial
Statements included elsewhere herein. |
|
(2) |
Europe, Middle East, and Africa |
|
(3) |
Includes the non-U.S. countries in The Americas. |
ACQUISITIONS
On July 26, 2004, we entered into an agreement and plan of
merger to acquire Matrics, a leader in developing EPC-compliant
RFID systems, for a cash purchase price of $230 million
(which includes certain payments to employee-stockholders of
Matrics). We consummated the acquisition of Matrics on
September 9, 2004. On October 29, 2004, Matrics was
merged with and into Symbol.
On June 17, 2004, Symbol acquired all of the outstanding
capital stock of Trio Security, Inc. (Trio Security)
for cash pursuant to a stock purchase agreement. Trio Security
developed next-generation security solutions for enterprise
networks and mobile applications for handheld devices.
|
|
|
Seal Sistemas e Technologia da Informacao Ltda. |
During 2002, we entered into an agreement with the owners of
Seal Sistemas e Technologia da Informacao Ltda.
(Seal), a Brazilian corporation that had operated as
a distributor and integrator of our
16
products since 1987. The agreement resulted in the termination
of distribution rights for Seal and the creation of a
majority-owned subsidiary of Symbol that would serve as the
Brazilian distributor and customer service entity (Symbol
Brazil). In accordance with the terms of the agreement,
the owners of Seal acquired a 49% ownership interest in Symbol
Brazil.
On January 10, 2004, the parties amended this transaction,
whereby Symbol Technologies Holdings do Brasil Ltda., a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Symbol, purchased an additional 34%
ownership interest of Symbol Brazil owned by two principals of
Seal. Symbol and Symbol Technologies Holdings do Brasil Ltda.
now own 85% of the capital of Symbol Brazil. Under the terms of
the relevant agreements, Symbol Brazil had its entity form
changed into a corporation and it will eventually become a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Symbol.
PRODUCT MANUFACTURING
Our products are principally manufactured at our Reynosa, Mexico
facility. We also have a facility in Bohemia, New York that we
utilize as a new product development center.
While components and supplies are generally available from a
variety of sources, we currently depend on a limited number of
suppliers for several components, certain subassemblies and
products. In the past, unexpected demand for communication
products caused worldwide shortages of certain electronic parts
and allocation of such parts by suppliers that had an adverse
impact on our ability to deliver our products as well as on the
cost of producing such products. While we have entered into
contracts with suppliers of parts that we anticipate may be in
short supply, there can be no assurance that additional parts
will not become the subject of such shortages or that such
suppliers will be able to deliver the parts in fulfillment of
their contracts.
Due to the general availability of components and supplies, we
do not believe that the loss of any supplier or subassembly
manufacturer would have a long-term material adverse effect on
our business although set-up costs and delays could occur in the
short term if we change any single source supplier.
Certain of our products are manufactured by third parties, most
of which are outside the United States. In particular, we have a
long-term strategic relationship with Olympus Optical, Inc. of
Japan (Olympus) pursuant to which Olympus and Symbol
jointly develop selected products that are manufactured by
Olympus exclusively for sale by us in the field of our business
and prospective businesses. We are currently selling several
such products. We have the right to manufacture such products if
Olympus is unable or unwilling to do so, but the loss of Olympus
as a manufacturer could have, at least, a temporary material
adverse impact on our ability to deliver such products to our
customers. The percentage of our product sales that include
products or that contain components manufactured by Olympus
historically has ranged from approximately 10% to 20% in any
given quarterly period. We have estimated that the temporary
adverse impact if we lost Olympus as a manufacturer would be
approximately 40% of the product sales that include products or
that contain components manufactured by Olympus or a temporary
adverse impact of approximately 4% to 8% of total product sales.
We employ certain advanced manufacturing processes that require
highly sophisticated and costly equipment and are continuously
being modified in an effort to improve efficiency, reduce
manufacturing costs and incorporate product improvements.
We generally maintain sufficient inventory to meet customer
demand for products on short notice, as well as to meet
anticipated sales levels. This includes carrying reasonable
amounts of inventory at our distributors in order to meet
customer delivery requirements in a manner consistent with
industry standards. If our product mix changes in unanticipated
ways, or if sales for particular products do not materialize as
anticipated, we may have excess inventory or inventory that
becomes obsolete. In such cases, our operating results could be
negatively affected.
RESEARCH AND PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT
We believe that our future growth depends, in large part, upon
our ability to continue to apply our technology and intellectual
property to develop new products, improve existing products and
expand market applications for our products. Our research and
development projects include, among other things, improve-
17
ments to the reliability, quality and capability of our laser
scanners to read at increased working distances and at faster
speeds and to decode higher density codes (including, but not
limited to, two-dimensional codes); continued development of our
solid state laser diode-based scanners; development of solid
state imager-based engines for bar code data capture and general
purpose imaging applications; development of RFID engines for
data capture applications; improvements to packaging and
miniaturization technology for bar code data capture products,
mobile data collection devices and integrated bar code and RFID
data capture products; development of high-performance digital
data radios, high-speed, secure, manageable mobile data
communications systems and telecommunications protocols and
products; the development of smart mobile devices
that may be located by intelligent wireless LAN systems; and the
addition of software to provide a complete line of
high-performance interface hardware.
We use both our own associates and from time to time
unaffiliated consultants in our product engineering and research
and development programs. From time to time we have participated
in and/or partially funded research projects in conjunction with
a number of universities including the State University of New
York at Stony Brook, Polytechnic University of New York and
Massachusetts Institute of Technology. We also jointly develop
technology with Olympus, as described above.
We expended (including overhead charges) approximately
$125.1 million, $108.8 million and $72.8 million
for research and development during the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. These
amounts are included as a component of engineering in the
consolidated statements of operations.
COMPETITION
The business in which we are engaged is highly competitive and
acutely influenced by advances in technology, industry
standards, product improvements and new product introduction and
price competition. Many firms are engaged in the manufacture and
marketing of products in bar code reading equipment, wireless
networks and mobile computing devices and mobility software.
Numerous companies, including present manufacturers of scanners,
lasers, optical instruments, microprocessors, wireless networks,
notebook computers, handheld devices and telephonic and other
communication devices have the technical potential to compete
with us. Many of these firms have far greater financial,
marketing and technical resources than we do. We compete
principally on the basis of performance and the quality of our
products and services.
We believe that our principal competitors are Casio, Inc., Cisco
Systems, Inc., Datalogic S.P.A., Fujitsu, Ltd., Hand Held
Products, Inc., Hewlett-Packard Company, Intermec Technologies
Corporation, LXE Inc., Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.,
Metrologic Instruments, Inc., Motorola, Inc., NCR Corporation,
DENSO Corporation, Opticon, Inc., Proxim, Inc., PSC, Inc. and
Psion Teklogix, Inc.
DEPENDENCE ON A GROUP OF CUSTOMERS
We are not dependent on any single customer, the loss of which
would have a material adverse effect on our business. However,
there are sales to one of our distribution partners that is
greater than 10% of our annual sales who in turn resell our
products. In addition, none of our segments is dependent on any
single customer or a few customers, the loss of which would have
a material adverse effect on any of our segments.
SEASONALITY
We do not believe that sales in either of our segments is
seasonal; however, within our Product Segment, certain product
divisions may experience sales seasonality.
PAYMENT TERMS
We offer industry standard payment terms and generally do not
grant extended payment terms.
PATENT AND TRADEMARK MATTERS
We file domestic and foreign patent applications to support our
technology position and new product development. Our
intellectual property includes more than 875 U.S. patents
and more than 565 international
18
patents. We have also filed additional patent applications in
the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office as well as in foreign
patent offices. We will continue to file patent applications,
both United States and foreign, to cover our most recent
research developments in the scanning, information collection
and network communications fields. One of our basic patents
covering handheld laser scanning technology expired on
June 6, 2000, and a key companion patent expired
June 3, 2003. Due to the recent expiration of these
patents, we may see increased competition in handheld trigger
combined bar code readers; however, we have not witnessed any
evidence of that to date. Notwithstanding the expiring patents,
we believe that our extensive patent portfolio will continue to
provide us with some level of competitive advantage.
Additionally, an important scanner-integrated computer patent
will expire in 2005, which could lead to increased competition
in the marketplace.
Although we believe that our patents provide a competitive
advantage, we believe we are not dependent upon a single patent,
or a few patents, the loss of which would have a material
adverse effect on our business. Our success depends more upon
our proprietary know-how, innovative skills, technical
competence and marketing abilities. In addition, because of
rapidly changing technology, our present intention is not to
rely primarily on patents or other intellectual property rights
to protect or establish our market position. However, Symbol has
in the past instituted litigation against competitors to enforce
its intellectual property rights and is currently involved in
several such lawsuits. Symbol has licensed some of its
intellectual property rights through royalty-bearing license
agreements. We may continue to enter into these types of
arrangements and other types of arrangements should the
circumstances lead us to believe that such an arrangement would
be beneficial.
We have received and have currently pending third party claims
and in the future may receive additional notices of such claims
of infringement of other parties rights. In such event, we
have and will continue to take reasonable steps to evaluate the
merits of such claims and take such action as we may deem
appropriate, which action may require that we enter into
licensing discussions, if available, and/or modify the affected
products and technology, or result in litigation against parties
seeking to enforce a claim which we reasonably believe is
without merit. We have been involved in such litigation in the
past, are currently involved in such litigation and additional
litigation may be filed in the future. Such parties have and are
likely to claim damages and/or seek to enjoin commercial
activities relating to our products or technology affected by
such parties rights. In addition to subjecting us to
potential liability for damages, such litigation may require us
to obtain a license in order to manufacture or market the
affected products and technology. To date, such activities have
not had a material adverse affect on our business and we have
either prevailed in all litigation, obtained a license on
commercially acceptable terms or otherwise been able to modify
any affected products or technology. However, there can be no
assurance that we will continue to prevail in any such actions
or that any license required under any such patent would be made
available on commercially acceptable terms, if at all. A failure
to obtain such licenses could have a material adverse effect on
our business, results of operations or financial condition.
There are a significant number of U.S. and foreign patents and
patent applications in our areas of interest, and we believe
that there has been and is likely to continue to be significant
litigation in the industry regarding patent and other
intellectual property rights. For a description of certain of
our intellectual property litigation, see Item 3.
Legal Proceedings Pending patent and trademark
litigation.
We have also obtained certain domestic and international
trademark registrations for our products and maintain certain
details about our processes, products and strategies as trade
secrets.
We regard our software as proprietary and attempt to protect it
with copyrights, trade secret law and international
nondisclosure safeguards, as well as restrictions on disclosure
and transferability that are incorporated into our software
license agreements. We license our software products to
customers rather than transferring title. Despite these
restrictions, it may be possible for competitors or users to
copy aspects of our products or to obtain information that we
regard as trade secrets. Our computer software generally has not
been patented and existing copyright laws afford only limited
practical protection. In addition, the laws of foreign countries
generally do not protect our proprietary rights in our products
to the same extent as do the laws of the United States.
19
GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS
The use of lasers and radio emissions are subject to regulation
in the United States and in other countries in which we do
business. In the United States, various Federal agencies
including the Center for Devices and Radiological Health of the
Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC), the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration and various State agencies have promulgated
regulations which concern the use of lasers and/or
radio/electromagnetic emissions standards. Member countries of
the European community have enacted standards concerning
electrical and laser safety and electromagnetic compatibility
and emissions standards.
Regulatory changes in the United States and other countries may
require modifications to some of our products in order for us to
continue to be able to manufacture and market these products.
For example, certain consumer advocacy groups are lobbying
against the adoption of RFID systems in the retail environment
because of privacy and other consumer protection concerns. While
we believe that these concerns are mostly unfounded, there can
be no assurance that such efforts will not result in regulatory
and/or legal action that could have a materially adverse effect
on our ability to manufacture and market RFID products.
Our RF mobile computing product line includes various models,
all of which intentionally transmit radio signals as part of
their normal operation. Certain versions of our handheld
computers and our Spectrum One and Spectrum 24 networks
utilize spread spectrum radio technology. We have obtained
certification from the FCC and other countries
certification agencies for our products that utilize this radio
technology. Users of these products in the United States do not
require any license from the FCC to use or operate these
products. Some of our products transmit narrow band radio
signals as part of their normal operation.
We have obtained certification from the FCC and other
countries certification agencies for our narrow band radio
products. Users of these products in the United States do not
require any license from the FCC to use or operate these
products. We also market radio products that utilize cellular
radio technology. We have obtained certification from the FCC
and other countries certification agencies for our
products that utilize this radio technology. Users of these
products in the United States do not require any license from
the FCC to use or operate these products.
In all cases, such certification is valid for the life of the
product unless the circuitry of the product is altered in any
material respect, in which case a new certification may be
required. Where a country certificate has a limited duration,
additional certification will be obtained during the life of the
product, when required.
In addition, some of our operations use substances regulated
under various federal, state, local and international laws
governing the environment and worker health and safety,
including those governing the discharge of pollutants into the
ground, air and water, the management and disposal of hazardous
substances and wastes and the cleanup of contaminated sites.
Certain of our products are subject to various federal, state,
local and international laws governing chemical substances in
electronic products.
In January 2003, the European Union (EU) issued two
directives relating to chemical substances in electronic
products. The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
Directive requires producers of electrical goods to pay for
specified collection, recycling, treatment and disposal of past
and future covered products. EU governments were required to
enact and implement legislation that complies with this
directive by August 13, 2004 (such legislation together
with the directive, the WEEE Legislation), and
certain producers are to be financially responsible under the
WEEE Legislation beginning in August 2005. The EU has issued
another directive that requires electrical and electronic
equipment placed on the EU market after July 1, 2006 to be
free of lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium (above a
threshold limit) and brominated flame retardants. EU governments
were required to enact and implement legislation that complies
with this directive by August 13, 2004 (such legislation
together with this directive, the RoHS Legislation).
Based upon current information available to us, we believe we
will be able to comply with these regulations within the
applicable time periods. However, if we do not comply with these
directives, we may suffer a loss of revenue, be unable to sell
in certain markets and/or countries, be subject to penalties and
enforced fees and/or suffer a competitive disadvantage. Similar
legislation could be enacted in other jurisdictions, including
in the United States. Costs to comply with the WEEE Legislation,
RoHS Legislation and/or similar future legislation, if
20
applicable, could include costs associated with modifying our
products, recycling and other waste processing costs, legal and
regulatory costs and insurance costs. We may also be required to
take reserves for costs associated with compliance with these
regulations.
EMPLOYEES
At March 9, 2005, we had approximately 5,400 full-time
employees. Of these, approximately 2,800 were employed in the
United States. Symbol also employs temporary production
personnel. None of our U.S. employees is represented by a
labor union. Some of our employees outside of the United States
are represented by labor unions. We consider our relationship
with our employees to be good.
MARKET AND INDUSTRY DATA
In this section of the report, we rely on and refer to
information and statistics regarding the industries and the
sectors in which we compete. We obtained this information and
these statistics from various third-party sources. We believe
that these sources and the estimates contained therein are
reliable, but have not independently verified them. Such
information involves risks and uncertainties and is subject to
change based on various factors, including those discussed under
the caption Risk Factors beginning on page 22
of this report.
21
RISK FACTORS
Set forth below are important risks and uncertainties that could
have a material adverse effect on Symbols business,
results of operations and financial condition and cause actual
results to differ materially from those expressed in
forward-looking statements made by Symbol or our management.
Risks relating to the investigations
|
|
|
We recently settled separate investigations by the SEC and
the Eastern District relating to the accounting misconduct of
our prior management. A violation of these settlement agreements
could result in further prosecution by the SEC and the Eastern
District. |
On June 3, 2004, we announced that the SEC and the Eastern
District concluded separate investigations relating to certain
of our prior accounting practices and the prior administration
of certain of our stock option plans. These investigations arose
in response to an inquiry from the SEC in 2001. As a result of
the SEC inquiry, we conducted an initial internal investigation,
with the assistance of a law firm, in May 2001 relating to such
accounting practices. We subsequently discovered that this
investigation was hindered by certain of our former employees.
As a result of the actions by these former employees, the SEC
expressed dissatisfaction with the investigation. In March 2002,
we undertook a second internal investigation that lasted
approximately 18 months, with the assistance of a different
law firm and an independent forensic accounting team. The
results of that internal investigation gave rise to the
restatement of our financial statements that affected our
selected data for 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001, our financial
statements for the years ended December 31, 2000 and 2001
and our unaudited selected quarterly information for each of the
four quarters in 2001 and the first three quarters of 2002.
We have resolved the investigations by the SEC and the Eastern
District and have entered into an injunction in connection with
our June 2004 settlement with the SEC and a non-prosecution
agreement with the Eastern District. As previously described, we
have engaged outside counsel to assist with the investigation of
the events leading to the discrepancies discovered at our
company-owned distribution facility in November 2004 and in
responding to requests made by the Eastern District and the SEC
regarding this matter, including whether Symbol has complied
with the injunction entered into in connection with its June
2004 settlement with the SEC and non-prosecution agreement with
the Eastern District. There can be no assurance that these
events will not give rise to an enforcement action or other
proceeding brought by the Eastern District or the SEC. If we are
found to have violated the injunction entered into in connection
with our June 2004 settlement with the SEC or the
non-prosecution agreement with the Eastern District or if we
commit other violations, such as accounting offenses that were
not the subject of the investigations, we have waived defenses
that may have otherwise been available to us, including the
statute of limitations, and will be subject to prosecution for
any offense, including any offense that was the subject of the
non-prosecution agreement. This could have a material adverse
effect on us. In addition, the agreements with the SEC and the
Eastern District required us to pay $37 million in cash to
a restitution fund for members of a class consisting of
purchasers of our stock from February 15, 2000 to
October 17, 2002 and $3 million to the United States
Postal Inspection Service Consumer Fraud Fund. We paid both
amounts prior to June 30, 2004. For a discussion of the
SEC and the Eastern District investigations, please see
Item. 3 Legal Proceedings.
|
|
|
Pending litigation relating to the accounting misconduct
of our prior management could generate negative publicity for
us. This could result in a decline in our stock price and cause
you to lose part of your investment. |
In March and June 2003 and February 2005, Robert Asti, our
former Vice President North America Sales and
Service Finance, Robert Korkuc, our former Chief
Accounting Officer and Brian Burke, a former Senior Vice
President of Worldwide Operations and a former Chief Accounting
Officer, respectively, pled guilty to two counts of securities
fraud in connection with the government investigations described
above. The SEC has filed civil complaints against
Messrs. Asti, Korkuc and Burke based upon similar facts.
Since June 2004, the Eastern District has announced that four
additional former employees, including Leonard
22
Goldner, our former Executive Vice President and General
Counsel, have pled guilty to various conspiracy charges.
In addition, Symbol, certain members of our former senior
management team and certain former members of our board of
directors were named defendants in two derivative actions, one
alleging violations of federal securities laws and other claims
similar to the class actions, and the second relating to the
distribution of proxy statements by former directors. On
July 27, 2004, the court approved a settlement in which
Symbol would be realigned as plaintiff in the first derivative
action, re-positioning us to proceed against Tomo Razmilovic,
one of our former Presidents, Chief Executive Officers and
directors, and other members of our former management and
certain former members of our board of directors. In September
2004, the court approved a settlement in which Symbol would be
realigned as the plaintiff in the second derivative suit related
to the proxy statements.
The guilty pleas of the seven individuals mentioned above; the
resolution of these civil complaints with the SEC; the continued
prosecution by the Eastern District of Tomo Razmilovic and five
other members of our former management; or the SECs filing
of complaints against eleven members of our former management
for securities fraud and other violations of the federal
securities laws could generate negative publicity for us and
result in a decline in our stock price.
|
|
|
Our indemnification of our former management obligates us
to indemnify and advance legal expenses to them, including with
respect to the pending criminal and civil litigation for
accounting misconduct, in accordance with the terms of our
certificate of incorporation, bylaws, other applicable
agreements and Delaware law. Our insurance coverage may not be
sufficient to cover our liabilities related to such litigation
and the settlement of the securities fraud class action
lawsuits. To the extent our insurance coverage is insufficient
to cover our liabilities, we may incur a material expense to
satisfy such obligations, which could have a material adverse
effect on our results of operations, financial position and cash
flows. |
We may be obligated to indemnify and advance legal expenses to
our former directors, officers or employees in accordance with
the terms of our certificate of incorporation, bylaws, other
applicable agreements and Delaware law. Our certificate of
incorporation and bylaws provide for the indemnification of our
directors and officers to the fullest extent permitted under
Delaware law. Under Delaware law, we may generally indemnify
directors, officers and other employees against expenses
(including attorneys fees), judgments, fines and amounts
paid in settlement in connection with specified actions, suits
and proceedings, whether civil, criminal, administrative or
investigative (other than in derivative actions), if they acted
in good faith and in a manner they reasonably believed to be in
or not opposed to the best interests of the corporation and,
with respect to any criminal action or proceeding, had no
reasonable cause to believe their conduct was unlawful. Although
our former directors and officers may seek coverage under our
current insurance policy, we have settled with our insurers who
have reimbursed us in the amount of $10.2 million and
therefore, our insurance coverage for them may not be sufficient
in some or all of these matters. Furthermore, the underwriters
of our directors and officers insurance policy may seek to
rescind or otherwise deny coverage in some or all of these
matters. For a discussion of the SEC and Eastern District
investigations and related class action and derivative
litigation, see Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
We do not expect our insurance coverage to cover our total
liabilities and related litigation costs in the actions
discussed above, including with respect to the securities fraud
class action lawsuits, and the total liabilities and costs are
still uncertain. We have currently accrued approximately
$86.6 million related to the settlement of the class action
lawsuits. The plaintiffs have yet to specify the amount of
damages being sought in the civil actions against our former
management and our former board of directors, and, therefore, we
are unable to estimate what our ultimate liability under our
indemnification obligations in such lawsuits may be. Our
indemnification obligations discussed above may have a material
adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition
and cash flows.
23
|
|
|
Senior management has been required to devote a
significant amount of time on matters arising from actions of
our prior management. If senior management is unable to devote a
significant amount of time in the future toward developing and
executing our strategic business initiatives and managing
ongoing business operations, we may not be able to remain
competitive and our revenues may decline. |
Our senior management team has devoted a significant amount of
time conducting internal investigations, restating our financial
statements, reviewing and improving our internal controls and
procedures, developing effective corporate governance procedures
and responding to government inquiries and the related class
action lawsuits arising form the actions of our prior
management. If senior management is unable to devote a
significant amount of time in the future toward developing and
executing our strategic business initiatives and managing
ongoing business operations, we may not be able to remain
competitive and our revenues may decline. In addition, much of
our middle management is new and may require a substantial
amount of time building customer relationships and learning
about and familiarizing themselves with Symbols products,
operations and business culture.
|
|
|
A failure to implement effectively and efficiently our
plan to remediate deficiencies in our internal controls and
procedures could result in accounting errors and in violations
of our settlement agreement with the SEC and our non-prosecution
agreement with the Eastern District. |
As previously reported in our consolidated financial statements
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003, we reported
that a material weakness existed related to the manner in which
we processed transactions to record revenue. Additionally, we
reported that deficiencies existed relating to the adequacy and
timeliness of account reconciliations, formalized worldwide
policies and procedures, the amount of manual journal entries
required to record transactions and the updating of documents
with customers. We also reported that for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2002, we had other material weaknesses that
have since been remediated. For information on the material
weaknesses and deficiencies reported for the fiscal years ended
December 31, 2002 and 2003, see Item 9. Change
in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure.
In addition, in November 2004, during our inventory testing
(including a planned physical inventory at a company-owned
distribution center), two unrelated errors were discovered.
These errors were the result of two discrete events. One event
involved inaccurate inventory levels reported to us by a large
distribution partner. The under-reported inventory levels
resulted in us inaccurately reporting $3.3 million in
revenues in our earnings release on October 26, 2004 for
the three and nine-month period ended September 30, 2004.
No previous periods were affected. This was an oversight on the
part of the distribution partner, which made us aware of the
reporting error as soon as it was discovered. The second
discrepancy was the result of errors that occurred at a
company-owned distribution facility that serves one of our large
retail customers. The distribution center relies on its own
internal reporting system and misreported inventory. As a result
of this second discrepancy, we over-reported revenue by
$10.3 million for the three and nine month periods ended
September 30, 2004 in our earnings release on
October 26, 2004. Based on these findings, management
believed there were significant deficiencies relating to its
controls for receiving, shipping and ultimately reporting the
amount of inventory. We are investigating the events leading to
the discrepancies discovered at our company-owned distribution
facility. We have engaged outside counsel to assist with the
investigation and in responding to requests made by the Eastern
District and the SEC regarding this matter, including whether
Symbol has complied with the injunction entered into in
connection with its June 2004 settlement with the SEC and
non-prosecution agreement with the Eastern District. There can
be no assurance that these events will not give rise to an
enforcement action or other proceeding brought by the Eastern
District or the SEC. The errors reported as described above led
to the delay, but timely, filing of our Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q as of and for the three- and nine- month periods
ended September 30, 2004.
In 2003 and continuing in 2004 as disclosed in certain of our
periodic filings, we have implemented and continue to implement
various initiatives to address the material weaknesses and
deficiencies in our internal controls as identified by our prior
auditors and our own internal investigations, conducted with the
oversight of
24
our audit committee. In response to the errors discussed in
November 2004, we have taken appropriate steps to ensure the
financial results are fairly presented in all material respects:
We believe these initiatives, along with the initiatives related
to our compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, address
our control environment, organization and staffing, policies,
procedures, documentation and information systems and are
intended to continuously improve our internal controls and
procedures, address systems and personnel issues and help ensure
a corporate culture that emphasizes integrity, honesty and
accurate financial reporting.
The implementation of these initiatives is one of our highest
priorities. Our board of directors, in coordination with our
audit committee, continually assesses the progress and
sufficiency of our initiatives related to our internal controls
and make adjustments as necessary. A failure of our internal
controls and procedures could result in mistakes in our reported
results and in violations of the injunction entered into in
connection with our June 2004 settlement with the SEC and our
non-prosecution agreement with the Eastern District and could
have a material adverse effect on our business, revenues or
financial condition.
|
|
|
We have experienced material weaknesses in our internal
controls. If we fail to maintain an effective system of internal
controls, we may not be able to provide timely and accurate
financial statements. This could cause investors to lose
confidence in our reported financial results and have a negative
effect on the trading price of our securities. |
During the past two years, we have identified a number of
material weaknesses and reportable
conditions in our internal financial controls. Some of
these weaknesses resulted in errors in our historical financial
statements, which in turn resulted in a restatement of our
financial statements that affected our selected data for 1998,
1999, 2000 and 2001, our financial statements for the years
ended December 31, 2000 and 2001 and our unaudited selected
quarterly information for each of the four quarters in 2001 and
the first three quarters of 2002.
Although we have taken significant steps to correct the internal
control deficiencies that resulted in the restatement of our
financial statements, during our inventory testing conducted in
connection with the reporting of our financial results for the
three and nine month periods ended September 30, 2004, we
identified significant deficiencies relating to the controls for
receiving, shipping and ultimately reporting the amount of our
inventory.
We have taken and continue to take steps to correct previously
identified internal control deficiencies. We cannot be certain
that these measures will ensure that we implement and maintain
adequate controls over our financial processes and reporting in
the future. Any failure to implement required new or improved
controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation
could harm our operating results or cause us to fail to meet our
reporting obligations. In addition, we cannot assure you that we
will not in the future identify further material weaknesses or
significant deficiencies in our internal control over financial
reporting that we have not discovered to date.
Beginning with the year ending December 31, 2004, pursuant
to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, our
management is required to deliver a report as part of the annual
report on Form 10-K that assesses the effectiveness of our
internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2004. Such report is set forth in
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures of this
annual report. Additionally, we are required to file with the
SEC an attestation report of our auditors on our
managements assessment of and operating effectiveness of
internal controls, which is included on page F-3 of this annual
report. If a material weakness were identified with respect to
our internal control over financial reporting, we would not be
able to conclude that our internal controls over financial
reporting were effective, which could result in the inability of
our external auditors to deliver an unqualified report, or any
report, on our internal controls. Inferior internal controls
could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported
financial information, which could have a negative effective on
the trading price of our securities.
25
Risks related to our business
|
|
|
We depend upon the development of new products and
enhancements to our existing products. If we fail to predict and
respond to emerging technological trends and our customers
changing needs or if we are unable to reduce our manufacturing
costs over time as anticipated, we may not be able to remain
competitive. |
We are active in the research and development of new products
and technologies and enhancing our current products. However,
research and development in the enterprise mobility industry is
complex and filled with uncertainty. If we expend a significant
amount of resources and our efforts do not lead to the
successful introduction of new or improved products, there could
be a material adverse effect on our business, operating results,
financial condition and market share. In addition, it is common
for research and development projects to encounter delays due to
unforeseen problems, resulting in low initial volume production,
fewer product features than originally considered desirable and
higher production costs than initially budgeted, which may
result in lost market opportunities. In addition, new products
may not be commercially well received. There could be a material
adverse effect on our business, operating results, financial
condition and market share due to such delays or deficiencies in
the development, manufacturing and delivery of new products.
We have made significant investments to develop enterprise
mobility products because we believe enterprise mobility is a
new and developing market in the information technology
industry. One example of our investments is our acquisition of
Matrics, a leader in developing EPC-compliant RFID systems. If
the RFID market or other markets in which we are investing do
not grow, retailers and consumers do not react enthusiastically
to enterprise mobility, we are unable to sell our enterprise
mobility products and services at projected rates or the market
adopts a standard for RFID technology that is different than
that offered by Matrics, then there could be a material adverse
effect on our business and operating results. Our efforts in
enterprise mobility are also dependent, in part, on applications
developed and infrastructure deployed by third parties. If third
parties do not develop robust, new or innovative applications or
create the appropriate infrastructure for enterprise mobility
products and offer them to us or our customers on commercially
reasonable terms, then there could be a material adverse effect
on our business and operating results.
Once a product is in the marketplace, its selling price usually
decreases over the life of the product, especially after a new
competitive product is publicly announced, because customers
often delay purchases of existing products until the new or
improved versions of those products are available. To lessen the
effect of price decreases, our research and development teams
attempt to reduce manufacturing costs of existing products in
order to maintain or improve our margins on such products.
However, if cost reductions do not occur in a timely manner,
there could be a material adverse effect on our operating
results and market share.
|
|
|
A court has rendered a judgment against us in the amount
of $218 million, which, if upheld on appeal, would have a
material adverse effect on our liquidity. |
On September 17, 2003, a jury awarded approximately
$218 million in damages against our wholly-owned
subsidiary, Telxon Corporation (Telxon), for claims
relating to an alleged contract between Telxon and Smart Media
of Delaware, Inc. (SMI). This sum included an award
of approximately $6 million to an individual. Telxon made
certain post-verdict motions seeking, among other things, a
judgment in its favor notwithstanding the verdict, a new trial
or a reduction in the amount of the jury verdicts. The court
denied all of these motions. The court also rejected
Telxons motion for a stay of entry of the judgment, and on
May 6, 2004, the court entered judgment against Telxon for
approximately $218 million in damages, plus statutory
interest from the date of the verdicts. The court also granted
the individuals motion to add Symbol as an additional
counterclaim defendant. While SMI withdrew its motion to add
Symbol as a counterclaim defendant, there can be no assurance
that Symbol will not ultimately be held liable for the full
amount of the jury verdicts, plus statutory interest from the
date of the verdicts. Symbol and Telxon have filed notices of
appeal of these rulings and the related verdicts. Symbol and
Telxon have deposited approximately $50 million into an
interest-bearing court escrow account to stay the execution of
the judgment against both Symbol and Telxon pending resolution
of the appeal. Symbol and Telxon have filed their opening briefs
on appeal. SMI
26
and the individual filed their respective briefs on
January 31, 2005 and Symbol and Telxon are due to respond
on or before March 15, 2005.
Our available cash, including cash available under our existing
lines of credit, may not be sufficient to pay jury verdicts of
this size, and we may need to obtain additional financing in
order to pay the judgment entered against Telxon in this matter.
There can be no assurance that we would be able to obtain
financing on terms favorable to us, or at all. In the event that
such a judgment remained unpaid, we would be in violation of the
terms of our new credit facility. In addition, we currently have
not recorded any liability in our consolidated financial
statements with respect to the jury verdicts and judgment
entered as we believe that, in accordance with the relevant
guidance set forth in Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies,
an unfavorable outcome of this litigation is not probable at
this time. Nevertheless, while we are still vigorously defending
against this lawsuit, we may ultimately be liable for the full
amount of the judgment, plus statutory interest from the date of
the verdicts, the payment of which would have a material adverse
effect on our results of operations, financial condition and
liquidity. For more information on this litigation and the
new credit facility, see Item 3. Legal
Proceedings Smart Media litigation and
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Existing indebtedness.
|
|
|
Our business, operating results and growth rates may be
adversely affected by unfavorable economic and market
conditions, as well as the volatile geopolitical
environment. |
Our current business and operating plan assumes that economic
activity in general, and information technology (IT)
spending in particular, will at least remain at current levels;
however, we cannot be assured of the level of IT spending, the
deterioration of which could have a material adverse effect on
our results of operations and growth rates. Our business is
especially affected by the economic success of the retail
sector, which accounts for a significant portion of our
business, and our results of operations may be adversely
affected if the global economic and market conditions in the
retail sector do not improve. For the year ended
December 31, 2004, direct sales to the retail sector
accounted for approximately 25% of our revenue. In addition, our
reseller customers sell our products to the retail sector, which
may represent a substantial portion of our reseller
customers sales. If historically low interest rates rise,
consumer demand could be further dampened and related retail IT
spending may be reduced.
|
|
|
We have made strategic acquisitions and entered into
alliances and joint ventures in the past and intend to do so in
the future. If we are unable to find suitable acquisitions or
partners or to achieve expected benefits from such acquisitions
or partnerships, there could be a material adverse effect on our
business, growth rates and results of operations. |
As part of our ongoing business strategy to expand product
offerings and acquire new technology, we frequently engage in
discussions with third parties regarding, and enter into
agreements relating to, possible acquisitions, strategic
alliances and joint ventures. If we are unable to identify
future acquisition opportunities or reach agreement with such
third parties, there could be a material adverse effect on our
business, growth rates and results of operations.
Even if we are able to complete acquisitions or enter into
alliances and joint ventures that we believe will be successful,
such transactions, especially those involving technology
companies like Matrics, are inherently risky. Significant risks
to these transactions, including the acquisition of Matrics,
include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
integration and restructuring costs, both one-time and ongoing; |
|
|
|
maintaining sufficient controls, policies and procedures; |
|
|
|
diversion of managements attention from ongoing business
operations; |
|
|
|
establishing new informational, operational and financial
systems to meet the needs of our business; |
|
|
|
losing key employees; |
27
|
|
|
|
|
failing to achieve anticipated synergies, including with respect
to complementary products; and |
|
|
|
unanticipated and unknown liabilities. |
|
|
|
The acquisition of Matrics had an immediate dilutive
effect on our 2004 earnings per share. In addition, the
acquisition of Matrics may not produce the revenue, earnings,
business synergies or technological advances that we anticipate.
This could have an adverse effect on our competitive position,
revenues and prospects for growth. |
The acquisition of Matrics had a $26.8 million negative
impact on our 2004 net earnings and a $0.11 negative impact
on earnings per share, primarily as a result of a
$12.8 million write-off of in process research and
development costs, interest expense and amortization of fees
associated with the short-term credit facility used to fund the
acquisition and the refinancing thereof with the new credit
facility on December 29, 2004. See Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations. Moreover, the RFID market
may not perform as expected for a variety of reasons, including
the failure in the development and acceptance of EPC-compliant
RFID systems, higher than expected implementation costs
associated with RFID and the unreliability of unproven
technology. In addition, a competitor of Symbol commenced a
patent infringement lawsuit against Matrics, which has since
been merged with and into Symbol. Any one or a combination of
these factors may cause our revenue or earnings to be further
negatively impacted.
We allocated approximately $194.4 million of the total
$237.9 million purchase price of the Matrics acquisition to
goodwill. The goodwill arose as the excess of the purchase price
over the fair value of net assets acquired of Matrics. We
perform annual evaluations for the potential impairment of the
carrying value of goodwill in accordance with
SFAS No. 142. If the financial performance of our
businesses were to decline significantly, we could incur a
non-cash charge to our income statement for the impairment of
goodwill.
We paid a significant premium for Matrics because we believe
that EPC-based technology will be a material area of investment
for our customers in our retail, manufacturing, transportation
and logistics, wholesale distribution, healthcare and government
vertical markets. We believe that Matrics is an early market
leader with its commercial tag and reader products based on its
trial deployments and full implementations with its customers in
retail, transportation, healthcare, and government vertical
markets. Our goal is to obtain a significant share of the market
by combining our expertise in sales and support for enterprise
mobility solutions along with our engineering resources and the
expertise of Matrics in this emerging market, which is a market
that is projected to grow rapidly in the next three to five
years.
The RFID market is at the early stages of development. However
we currently believe that the costs we will incur during the
product life cycle for both existing technology and future,
replacement, RFID technology will be consistent with the
expenditures we have incurred in developing and maintaining our
existing enterprise mobility solutions.
If we are unable to develop or enhance the Matrics technology
within the timeframe expected, we may not meet our revenue and
profitability projections. Furthermore, we believe that a number
of our existing customers intend to deploy RFID systems
utilizing technology such as that provided by Matrics and if we
fail to deliver those products, those customers may be less
willing to purchase our other existing products, further
negatively impacting revenue and profitability. If we do not
develop or enhance the Matrics technology in line with our
projections, we may be required to incur higher operating and
capital expenses than expected in order to address these issues
and meet projections.
|
|
|
The enterprise mobility industry is highly competitive,
and competitive pressures from existing and new companies may
have a material adverse effect on our business, revenues, growth
rates and market share. |
The enterprise mobility industry is a highly competitive
industry that is influenced by the following:
|
|
|
|
|
advances in technology; |
|
|
|
new product introductions; |
28
|
|
|
|
|
evolving industry standards; |
|
|
|
product improvements; |
|
|
|
rapidly changing customer needs; |
|
|
|
intellectual property invention and protection; |
|
|
|
marketing and distribution capabilities; |
|
|
|
competition from highly capitalized companies; |
|
|
|
entrance of new competitors; |
|
|
|
ability of customers to invest in information
technology; and |
|
|
|
price competition. |
If we do not keep pace with product and technology advances,
there could be a material adverse effect on our competitive
position, revenues and prospects for growth. There is also
likely to be continued pricing pressure as competitors attempt
to maintain or increase market share.
The products manufactured and marketed by us and our competitors
in the enterprise mobility industry are becoming more complex.
As the technological and functional capabilities of future
products increase, these products may begin to compete with
products being offered by traditional computer, network and
communications industry participants that have substantially
greater financial, technical, marketing and manufacturing
resources than we do. We may not be able to compete successfully
against these new competitors, and competitive pressures may
result in a material adverse effect on our business or operating
results.
|
|
|
We are subject to risks related to our operations outside
the United States. Unpredictable foreign sales and manufacturing
environments may have a materially adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and revenues. |
A substantial portion of our revenue has been generated from
sales outside the United States. For the year ended
December 31, 2004, non-U.S. sales accounted for
approximately 40.6% of our revenue. We also manufacture most of
our products outside the United States, and we anticipate that
an increasing percentage of new products and subassemblies will
be manufactured outside the United States. Overall margins for
our products have increased throughout 2003 and 2004, partially
as a result of increased efficiencies due to the transfer of
internal manufacturing to our Reynosa, Mexico facility and
external manufacturing to lower cost producers in China, Taiwan
and Singapore.
These sales and manufacturing activities are subject to the
risks of foreign operations, including the following:
|
|
|
|
|
increased security requirements; |
|
|
|
political uncertainties; |
|
|
|
transportation delays and interruptions; |
|
|
|
the impact of recessionary or inflationary foreign economies; |
|
|
|
adapting to different regulatory requirements; and |
|
|
|
different technology standards or customer expectations. |
Many of these risks have affected our business in the past and
may in the future have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition and revenues. We cannot predict
whether the United States or any other country will impose new
quotas, tariffs, taxes or other trade barriers upon the
importation of our products or supplies, any of which could have
a material adverse effect on our results of operations and
financial condition.
29
|
|
|
Our sales and manufacturing activities in foreign
countries may be subject to lengthy receivables collection
periods. A significant increase in our uncollected receivables
may have a material adverse effect on our earnings and financial
condition. |
Economic conditions in foreign countries where obligors under
our receivables reside may affect our ability to collect our
receivables. Such economic conditions include, but are not
limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
unemployment; |
|
|
|
interest rates; |
|
|
|
exchange rates; |
|
|
|
inflation rates; and |
|
|
|
consumer perceptions of the economy. |
If a large number of our obligors located in a foreign country
experience any of the above-mentioned conditions, or other
conditions, or if we otherwise experience a significant increase
in the length of our receivables collection periods or the
amount of our uncollected receivables, we may experience a
material adverse effect on our earnings and financial condition.
At December 31, 2004, our percentage of
non-U.S. receivables was approximately 45%. In addition, at
December 31, 2004, our percentage of doubtful accounts for
customers outside the U.S. was approximately 35% of our
total allowance for doubtful accounts.
|
|
|
We may face trade barriers that could have a material
adverse effect on our results of operations and result in a loss
of customers or suppliers. |
Trade barriers erected by the United States or other countries
may interfere with our ability to offer our products and
services in those markets. We cannot predict whether the United
States or any other country will impose new quotas, tariffs,
taxes or other trade barriers upon the importation or
exportation of our products or supplies, any of which could have
a material adverse effect on our results of operations and
financial condition. Competition and trade barriers in those
countries could require us to reduce prices, increase spending
on marketing or product development, withdraw from or not enter
certain markets or otherwise take actions adverse to us.
In all jurisdictions in which we operate, we are also subject to
the laws and regulations that govern foreign investment and
foreign trade, which may limit our ability to repatriate cash as
dividends or otherwise to the United States.
|
|
|
Fluctuations in the exchange rate of the U.S. dollar
and other foreign currencies could have a material adverse
effect on our results of operations and financial condition,
including our sales and margins. |
Most of our equipment sales in Western Europe and Asia are
billed in foreign currencies and are subject to currency
exchange fluctuations. In prior years, changes in the value of
the U.S. dollar compared to foreign currencies have had an
impact on our sales and margins. We have a formal policy that
permits the use of financial instruments to manage and reduce
the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates that
may arise in the normal course of our business. This policy
prohibits the use of currency derivatives or other financial
instruments for trading or speculative purposes. However, we
cannot predict the direction or magnitude of future currency
fluctuations. A weakening of the currencies in which we generate
sales relative to the currencies in which our costs are
denominated may lower our results of operations and impair our
financial condition. For example, we purchase a large number of
parts, components and third-party products from Japan. The value
of the yen in relation to the U.S. dollar strengthened
during 2002 and 2003 and has continued to appreciate throughout
2004. If the value of the yen continues to strengthen relative
to the dollar, there could be a material adverse effect on our
results of operations.
We enter into forward foreign exchange contracts and foreign
currency loans principally to hedge the currency fluctuations in
transactions denominated in foreign currencies, thereby limiting
our risk that would otherwise result from changes in exchange
rates. During 2003 and 2004, the principal transactions hedged
30
were short-term intercompany sales. The periods of the forward
foreign exchange contracts and foreign currency loans correspond
to the periods of the hedged transactions.
In all jurisdictions in which we operate, we are subject to the
laws and regulations that govern currency exchange transactions,
which may limit our ability to convert foreign currency cash
flows into U.S. dollars.
|
|
|
We rely on our manufacturing facility in Reynosa, Mexico
to manufacture a significant portion of our products. Any
problems at the Reynosa facility could have a material adverse
effect on our business, costs of revenue and financial
condition. |
For the year ended December 31, 2004, approximately 56% of
our product cost of revenue can be attributed to our facility in
Reynosa, and we estimate that such percentage will be similar or
higher for 2005. Approximately 60% of the products manufactured
in this facility represent scanners and approximately 40%
represent mobile computer products. In the past, we have
experienced manufacturing problems in the ordinary course of
business, such as equipment breakdowns and short-term employee
shortages, that have caused delivery delays. While these past
delays have not been material, we may experience material
production difficulties and product delivery delays in the
future as a result of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
changing process technologies; |
|
|
|
ramping production; |
|
|
|
installing new equipment at our manufacturing facilities; |
|
|
|
ability to hire and retain skilled employees; and |
|
|
|
shortage of key components. |
If manufacturing problems in our Reynosa facility were to arise
or if use of our manufacturing facility in Reynosa were to be
interrupted by natural disaster or any other event, and we are
unable to develop alternative sources for our production needs,
we may not be able to meet customer demand for our products,
which could have a material adverse effect on our business,
costs of operations and financial condition. In addition, we
have been sued in Mexico by a plaintiff who alleges she is the
legal owner of all or a portion of the property on which our
facility in Reynosa is located. The loss of this lawsuit could
have a material adverse effect on our business, costs of revenue
and financial condition. See Item 3. Legal
Proceedings Other litigation Lic.
Olegario Cavazos Cantu, on behalf of Maria Leonor Cepeda Zapata
vs. Symbol de Mexico, Sociedad de R.L. de C.V.
|
|
|
Some components, subassemblies and products are purchased
from a single supplier or a limited number of suppliers. The
loss of any of these suppliers may cause us to incur additional
set-up costs, result in delays in manufacturing and delivering
our products or cause us to carry excess or obsolete
inventory. |
While components and supplies are generally available from a
variety of sources, we currently depend on a limited number of
suppliers for several components for our equipment, and certain
subassemblies and products. Some components, subassemblies and
products are purchased from a single supplier or a limited
number of suppliers. For example, we have a long-term strategic
relationship with Olympus Optical, Inc. of Japan pursuant to
which Olympus and Symbol jointly develop selected products that
are manufactured by Olympus exclusively for sale by us in the
field of our business and prospective businesses. The percentage
of our product sales that include products or that contain
components manufactured by Olympus historically has ranged from
approximately 10% to 20% in any given quarterly period. We have
estimated that the temporary adverse impact if we lost Olympus
as a manufacturer would be approximately 40% of the product
sales that include products or that contain components
manufactured by Olympus or a temporary adverse impact of
approximately 4% to 8% of total product sales. In addition, for
certain components, subassemblies and products for which we may
have multiple sources, we are still subject to significant price
increases and limited availability due to market demand for such
components, subassemblies and products. In the past, unexpected
demand for communication products caused worldwide shortages of
certain electronic parts, which had an adverse impact on our
business. While we have entered into contracts with suppliers of
parts that we anticipate
31
may be in short supply, there can be no assurance that
additional parts will not become the subject of such shortages
or that such suppliers will be able to deliver the parts in
fulfillment of their contracts. In addition, on occasion, we
increase our component inventory in anticipation of supply
shortages, which may result in our carrying excess or obsolete
components if we do not properly anticipate customer demand and
could have a material adverse effect on our business and results
of operations.
If shortages or delays exist, we may not be able to secure an
adequate number of components at reasonable prices and
acceptable quality and, therefore, may not be able to meet
customer demand for our products, which could have a material
adverse effect on our business and results of operations.
Although the availability of components did not materially
impact our business in 2003 or 2004, we cannot predict when and
if component shortages will occur.
|
|
|
We outsource the manufacturing of many of our components
and products, and if third-party manufacturers lack sufficient
quality control or if there are significant changes in the
financial or business condition of such third-party
manufacturers, our ability to supply quality products to our
customers may be disrupted. |
We increasingly depend on outsourced manufacturing, primarily by
manufacturers located outside the United States. Our increasing
dependence on third-party manufacturers for outsourced
components subjects us to the risk of supplier failure and
customer dissatisfaction with the quality or performance of our
products containing such purchased components. Quality or
performance failures by our third-party manufacturers or changes
in their financial or business condition could disrupt our
ability to supply quality products to our customers and thereby
have a material adverse effect on our business, revenues and
financial condition.
In addition, third-party manufacturers for outsourced components
are consolidating in the electronic component industry. The
consolidation of our third-party manufacturers for outsourced
components may give the remaining and larger third-party
manufacturers greater leverage to increase the prices that they
charge and thereby increase our cost of component parts.
|
|
|
Management of our inventory will be complex as we continue
to sell a significant mix of products through distributors.
Fluctuations in distributor demand may cause us to reduce our
prices and write down inventory, which could result in lower
gross margins. |
We must manage inventory effectively, particularly with respect
to sales to distributors. Our gross inventory at the end of 2002
was $431 million with an estimated valuation allowance of
$170 million or 39%. As of December 31, 2004, gross
inventory has been reduced to $262 million with an
estimated valuation allowance of $55 million or 21%.
Management during this time period has improved its management
of inventory, particularly its management of its supply chain as
well as through its distribution channel. However, distributors
may increase orders during periods of product shortages, cancel
orders if their inventory is too high or delay orders in
anticipation of new products. Distributors also may adjust their
orders in response to the supply of our products and the
products of our competitors and seasonal fluctuations in
end-user demand. If we have excess inventory, we may have to
reduce our prices and write down inventory, which in turn could
result in a lower gross margin.
|
|
|
We sell a majority of our products through resellers,
distributors and original equipment manufacturers
(OEMs). If the third-party distribution sources on
which we rely do not perform their services adequately or
efficiently or if they exit the industry, and we are not able to
quickly find adequate replacements, there could be a material
adverse effect on our revenue. |
We sell a majority of our products through resellers,
distributors and OEMs. Some of our third-party distribution
sources may have insufficient financial resources and may not be
able to withstand changes in worldwide business conditions,
including economic downturn, or abide by our inventory and
credit requirements. If the third-party distribution sources on
which we rely do not perform their services adequately or
efficiently or exit the industry, and we are not able to quickly
find adequate replacements, there could be a material adverse
effect on our revenue and market share. In addition, we do not
have third-party distribution
32
sources in certain parts of the world. If we are unable to
effectively and efficiently supply and service customers outside
our current geographic scope, there may be a material adverse
effect on our growth rates and result of operations.
In 2003, we implemented a new distribution system called the
Symbol
PartnerSelecttm
Program that is designed to increase our business and the
business of our resellers, distributors and OEMs and improve the
quality of service and products offered to end users of our
products and services. For example, under the Symbol
PartnerSelecttm
Program, resellers are selected for a program track and level
based on a number of different criteria such as hardware,
software, and service offerings, number and level of Symbol
certifications, level of partnership commitment and level of
customer support. If the new program does not continue to be
well received by our resellers, distributors and OEMs, or end
users of our products and services, there could be a material
adverse effect on our operating results. For example, one of our
former resellers was not selected to participate in the Symbol
PartnerSelecttm
Program and has sued us for unfair competition in Europe. See
Item 3. Legal proceedings.
|
|
|
If we are unable to protect our intellectual property
rights or if third parties assert we are in violation of their
intellectual property rights, there could be a material adverse
effect on our results of operations and our ability to attract
new customers and retain current customers. |
We protect our proprietary information and technology through
licensing agreements, third-party nondisclosure agreements and
other contractual provisions, as well as through patent,
trademark, copyright and trade secret laws in the United States
and similar laws in other countries. There can be no assurance
that these protections will be available in all cases or will be
adequate to prevent our competitors from copying, reverse
engineering or otherwise obtaining and using our technology,
proprietary rights or products. Furthermore, there can be no
assurance that our competitors will not independently develop
technologies that are substantially equivalent or superior to
our technology or design around our proprietary rights. In
addition, an important scanner-integrated computer patent will
expire in 2005. In each case, our ability to compete and to
receive licensing revenues could be significantly impaired. To
prevent substantial unauthorized use of our intellectual
property rights, it may be necessary to prosecute actions for
infringement and/or misappropriation of our proprietary rights
against third parties. Any such action could result in
significant costs and diversion of our resources and
managements attention, and there can be no assurance that
we will be successful in such action. In addition, third parties
may seek to challenge, invalidate or circumvent our patents,
trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets, or applications for
any of the foregoing. Furthermore, the laws of certain countries
in which our products are or may be licensed do not protect our
proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the United
States.
Third parties have, and may in the future, assert claims of
infringement of intellectual property rights against us or
against our partners for which we may be liable under certain
terms of indemnification. Due to the rapid pace of technological
change in our industry, much of our business and many of our
products rely on proprietary technologies of third parties, and
we may not be able to obtain, or continue to obtain, licenses
from such third parties on reasonable terms. We have received,
and have currently pending, third-party claims and may receive
additional notices of such claims of infringement in the future.
To date, such activities have not had a material adverse effect
on our business, and we have either prevailed in all litigation,
obtained a license on commercially acceptable terms or otherwise
been able to modify any affected products or technology.
However, there can be no assurance that we will continue to
prevail in any such actions or that any license required under
any such patent or other intellectual property would be made
available on commercially acceptable terms, if at all. In
addition, any such claim of infringement could result in an
injunction that prevents us from distributing certain products
or performing certain services. The failure to obtain a license
on commercially reasonable terms or the entry of an injunction
that impairs our ability to market certain products or services
could have a material adverse affect on our business, results of
operations or financial condition. Since we and third parties
hold a significant number of U.S. and foreign patents and patent
applications related to our business, we believe that there is
likely to continue to be significant litigation regarding patent
and other intellectual property rights, which could have a
material adverse effect on our business and our ability to
compete. For example, Intermec IP Corp. (Intermec)
filed suit against Matrics (prior to the
33
announcement of our acquisition of Matrics), asserting
infringement of four patents owned by Intermec relating to RFID
readers, chips, RFID tag operation and the integration of tags
with wireless memory devices. On October 29, 2004, Matrics
was merged with and into Symbol and now Symbol is defending the
case. Additionally, Nanopower Technologies, Inc.
(Nanopower) filed suit against Matrics and us
asserting, among other things, breach of an intellectual
property license agreement, breach of a confidentiality
agreement and misappropriation of trade secrets relating to a
low voltage RFID tag startup technology. For more details on
the Intermec litigation, the Nanopower litigation and other
intellectual property litigation, see Item 3. Legal
Proceedings Pending patent and trademark
litigation.
|
|
|
New safety regulations or changes in existing safety
regulations related to our products may result in unanticipated
costs or liabilities, which could have a materially adverse
effect on our business, results of operations and future sales
and could place additional burdens on the operations of our
business. |
Radio emissions and the use of lasers are subject to regulation
in the United States and in other countries in which we do
business. In the United States, various federal agencies
including the Center for Devices and Radiological Health of the
Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Communications
Commission, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration
and various state agencies have promulgated regulation that
concern the use of lasers and/or radio/electromagnetic emissions
standards. Member countries of the European community have
enacted standards concerning electrical and laser safety and
electromagnetic compatibility and emissions standards.
If any of our products becomes subject to new regulations or if
any of our products becomes specifically regulated by additional
government entities, compliance with such regulations could
become more burdensome and there could be a material adverse
effect on our business and our results of operations.
In addition, our wireless communication products operate through
the transmission of radio signals. Currently, operation of these
products in specified frequency bands does not require licensing
by regulatory authorities. Regulatory changes restricting the
use of frequency bands or allocating available frequencies could
become more burdensome and could have a material adverse effect
on our business, results of operations and future sales.
|
|
|
Compliance with environmental matters and worker health
and safety laws could be costly and noncompliance with these
laws could have a material adverse effect on our results of
operations, expenses and financial condition. |
Some of our operations use substances regulated under various
federal, state, local and international laws governing the
environment and worker health and safety, including those
governing the discharge of pollutants into the ground, air and
water, the management and disposal of hazardous substances and
wastes and the cleanup of contaminated sites. Certain of our
products are subject to various federal, state, local and
international laws governing chemical substances in electronic
products. We could be subject to increased costs, fines, civil
or criminal sanctions, third-party property damage or personal
injury claims if we violate or become liable under environmental
and/or worker health and safety laws.
In January 2003, the European Union (EU) issued two
directives relating to chemical substances in electronic
products. The Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment
Directive requires producers of electrical goods to pay for
specified collection, recycling, treatment and disposal of past
and future covered products. EU governments were required to
enact and implement legislation that complies with this
directive by August 13, 2004 (such legislation together
with the directive, the WEEE Legislation), and
certain producers are to be financially responsible under the
WEEE Legislation beginning in August 2005. The EU has issued
another directive that requires electrical and electronic
equipment placed on the EU market after July 1, 2006
to be free of lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium (above
a threshold limit) and brominated flame retardants. EU
governments were required to enact and implement legislation
that complies with this directive by August 13, 2004
(such legislation together with this directive, the RoHS
Legislation). If we do not comply with these directives,
we may suffer a loss of revenue, be unable to sell in certain
markets and/or countries, be subject to penalties and enforced
fees and/or suffer a competitive disadvantage. Similar
34
legislation could be enacted in other jurisdictions, including
in the United States. Costs to comply with the WEEE Legislation,
RoHS Legislation and/or similar future legislation, if
applicable, could include costs associated with modifying our
products, recycling and other waste processing costs, legal and
regulatory costs and insurance costs. We may also be required to
take reserves for costs associated with compliance with these
regulations. We cannot assure you that the costs to comply with
these new laws, or with current and future environmental and
worker health and safety laws will not have a material adverse
effect on our results of operation, expenses and financial
condition.
|
|
|
If we are unable to recruit and retain key employees, this
could affect our ability to successfully grow our
business. |
In order to be successful, we must retain and motivate our
executives and other key employees, including those in
managerial, technical, marketing and information technology
support positions. In particular, our product generation efforts
rely on hiring and retaining qualified engineers. Attracting and
retaining skilled solutions providers in the IT support business
and qualified sales representatives are also critical to our
success. With the exception of Mr. Nuti, our President and
Chief Executive Officer, none of our current employees has
entered into an employment agreement with us and all such
individuals are at will employees.
Experienced management and technical, marketing and support
personnel in the information technology industry are in high
demand and competition for their talents is intense. The loss
of, or the inability to recruit, key employees could have a
material adverse effect on our business.
|
|
|
Covenants in our new credit facility may limit our ability
to operate our business, which in turn could adversely affect
our earnings and financial condition, and may limit our ability
to take advantage of potential business opportunities as they
arise. |
Our new credit facility contains covenants that restrict our
ability to make distributions or other payments to our investors
and creditors unless we satisfy certain financial tests or other
criteria. We must also comply with certain specified financial
ratios and tests. Our material U.S. subsidiaries are
subject to similar restrictions which may restrict their ability
to make certain distributions to us. Our new credit facility
contains additional affirmative and negative covenants,
including limitations on our ability to incur additional
indebtedness, limitations to entering into certain acquisitions,
limitations on making capital expenditures, limitations on
payment of dividends and limitations on repurchases of common
stock under the employee stock purchase program. As of
December 31, 2004, we were in compliance with the covenants
under the new credit facility. All of these restrictions could
affect our ability to operate our business, which in turn could
adversely affect our earnings and financial condition, and may
limit our ability to take advantage of potential business
opportunities as they arise.
If we do not comply with these covenants and restrictions, we
could be in default under our new credit facility, and the debt
incurred thereunder, together with accrued interest, could then
be declared immediately due and payable. If we default under our
new credit facility, the lenders could cause all of our
outstanding debt obligations under our new credit facility to
become due and payable, require us to apply all of our cash to
repay the indebtedness under such new credit facility or prevent
us from making debt service payments on our other indebtedness.
If we are unable to repay any borrowings when due, the lenders
under our new credit facility could proceed against their
collateral, which includes most of the assets we own. In
addition, any default under our new credit facility could lead
to an acceleration of debt under other debt instruments that
contain cross acceleration or cross-default provisions. If the
indebtedness under our new credit facility and our other debt
instruments is accelerated, we may not have sufficient assets to
repay amounts due under our new credit facility or indebtedness
under our other debt instruments. Our ability to comply with
these provisions of the new credit facility may be affected by
changes in the economic or business conditions or other events
beyond our control. See Item 7. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Existing indebtedness.
35
ACCESS TO INFORMATION
Symbols Internet address is www.symbol.com.
Through the Investor Relations section of our Internet
website (http://www.symbol.com/investors), we make
available, free of charge, our Annual Report on Form 10-K,
Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on
Form 8-K and any amendments to those reports filed or
furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange
Act), as well as any filings made pursuant to
Section 16 of the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably
practicable after we electronically file such material with, or
furnish it to, the Commission. Additionally, the charters of our
Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, Nominating and
Corporate Governance Committee and our Corporate Governance
Guidelines and Statement of Corporate Policy and Code of
Conduct are available on the Investor Relations section of
our Internet website. Copies are also available, without charge,
from Symbol Investor Relations, One Symbol Plaza, Holtsville,
New York 11742. Our Internet website and the information
contained therein or incorporated therein are not incorporated
into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
You may also read and copy materials that we have filed with the
Commission at the Commissions Public Reference Room
located at 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Room 1024,
Washington, D.C. 20549. Please call the Commission at
1-800-SEC-0330 for further information on the Public Reference
Room. In addition, the Commission maintains as Internet site
that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and
other information regarding issuers that file electronically at
www.sec.gov.
The following table states the location, primary use and
approximate size of all of our principal plants and facilities
and the duration of our tenancy with respect to each facility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location |
|
Principal Use |
|
Size (square feet) | |
|
Tenancy/Ownership |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
One Symbol Plaza
Holtsville, New York |
|
World Headquarters |
|
|
299,000 |
|
|
Owned |
|
5400 George McVay
Drive McAllen, Texas |
|
Distribution Facility |
|
|
334,000 |
|
|
Owned |
|
Avenida Industrial Rio
San Juan Mz-9-L-4,
Parque Del Norte
Reynosa, Tamaulipas
Mexico |
|
Manufacturing |
|
|
296,000 |
|
|
Owned |
|
116 Wilbur Place
Bohemia, New York |
|
Operations Offices,
Labs |
|
|
90,000 |
|
|
Owned |
|
110 Wilbur Place
Bohemia, New York |
|
Manufacturing, Development Lab |
|
|
30,000 |
|
|
Owned |
|
6480 Via Del Oro,
Valley Oak Technology
Campus
San Jose, California |
|
Network Systems
Engineering, Marketing |
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
Leased: expires August 31,
2009 |
|
1220 Don Haskins Drive
El Paso, Texas |
|
Customer Service Center and Warehouse |
|
|
62,907 |
|
|
Leased: expires
December 31, 2007 |
|
Symbol Place,
100 Berkshire Place,
Winnersh Triangle
Winnersh, United Kingdom |
|
EMEA Headquarters,
Marketing and
Administration and
United Kingdom
Headquarters |
|
|
55,500 |
|
|
Leased: expires December 31, 2012 |
|
2814 Infonavit Casa
Grandes, Cd. Juarez
Chih, Mexico |
|
Customer Service Center
and Warehouse |
|
|
51,300 |
|
|
Leased: expires
March 31,
2005 |
36
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Location |
|
Principal Use |
|
Size (square feet) | |
|
Tenancy/Ownership |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Avenida Valle del
Cedro #1310 Parque Industrial
Intermex, Cd
Juarez Chih, Mexico |
|
New Facility |
|
|
78,533 |
|
|
Leased: expires
February 28, 2015 |
Technology Park
Technicka 15, Brno 616
00 Czech Republic |
|
Customer Service and
Shared Financial
Services |
|
|
102,153 |
|
|
Leased: expires
June 30,
2014 |
|
Palm Terrace 25541
Commercentre Drive
Lake Forest, California |
|
Sales, Customer Service
and Marketing |
|
|
42,090 |
|
|
Leased: expires
December 31, 2008 (Option to vacate December 31, 2006) |
|
300 Allegheny Drive
Warrendale,
Pennsylvania |
|
Sales |
|
|
67,540 (7,000 subleased |
) |
|
Leased: expires
November 30, 2012 |
|
RMZ Ecospace Block 3B
Outer Ring Road
Bangalore, India |
|
New Facility |
|
|
82,000 |
|
|
Leased: expires
October 13, 2009 |
In addition to these principal locations, we lease other offices
throughout the world, ranging in size from approximately 150 to
40,000 square feet.
|
|
Item 3. |
Legal Proceedings. |
We are a party to lawsuits arising in the normal course of
business. Litigation arising in the normal course of business,
as well as the lawsuits and investigations described below, can
be expensive, lengthy and disruptive to normal business
operations. Moreover, the results of complex legal proceedings
and government investigations are difficult to predict. Unless
otherwise specified, Symbol is currently unable to estimate,
with reasonable certainty, the possible loss, or range of loss,
if any, for the lawsuits and investigations described herein. An
unfavorable resolution to any of the lawsuits or investigations
described below could have a material adverse effect on
Symbols business, results of operations or financial
condition.
Government investigations
In May 2001, in response to an inquiry from the SEC, we retained
a law firm to conduct an internal investigation into certain
allegations concerning our accounting practices, focusing on
specific transactions with two of our customers but also
including a limited review of other large transactions. The law
firm retained an accounting firm to assist it in the
investigation. We subsequently discovered that this
investigation was hindered by certain of our former employees.
As a result of actions by these former employees, the SEC
expressed dissatisfaction with the investigation.
In March 2002, we retained a second law firm to conduct a
wide-ranging internal investigation into our accounting
practices. The investigation was conducted over a period of
approximately eighteen months with the assistance of an outside
forensic accounting team. The SEC and the Eastern District
commenced separate but related investigations relating to our
accounting practices.
The investigation found that, during the period covered by the
restatement, certain members of former management engaged in,
directed and/or created an environment that encouraged a variety
of inappropriate activities that resulted in accounting errors
and irregularities affecting our previously issued financial
statements that we have now restated. The errors and
irregularities caused by these actions primarily concerned the
timing and amount of product and service revenue recognized. In
particular, the investigation found that revenue was accelerated
from the appropriate quarters to earlier quarters through a
variety of improper means and, on a more limited basis, revenue
was improperly created and inflated on a net basis.
37
Additionally, there were errors and irregularities associated
with the establishment and utilization of certain reserves and
restructurings, including certain end-of-quarter adjustments
that were apparently made in order to achieve previously
forecasted financial results. There were also errors and/or
irregularities associated with the administration of certain
options programs, as well as several categories of cost of
revenue and operating expenses, including efforts to
artificially reduce reported inventory.
In addition, the internal investigation uncovered efforts by
certain then employees, including certain members of then
management, to impede both the initial and second internal
investigations. The employees responsible for directing such
conduct resigned or were terminated.
The investigation found that, in addition to the specific items
of misconduct giving rise to the need for the restatement, there
was a failure by our former management to establish an
appropriate control environment, and there were significant
failures in our internal controls and procedures resulting from
numerous causes, including inadequate hiring of qualified and
experienced personnel, insufficient training and supervision of
personnel, a decentralized accounting structure for operations
in the United States and inadequate systems and systems
interfaces. The investigation also found instances in which some
members of former management and sales and finance-related
employees devoted insufficient attention and resources to
ensuring accurate accounting and financial reporting. As the
guilty pleas of three former senior members of our finance group
illustrate, there were also instances in which such activity
rose to the level of criminal misconduct. All of the members of
senior management who were primarily responsible for the errors
and irregularities underlying the restatement either have been
terminated from employment at Symbol as part of the internal
investigation or have left Symbol, including Tomo Razmilovic,
one of our former Presidents, Chief Executive Officers and
directors, and Kenneth Jaeggi, our former Senior Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer. We assembled a new management team
and appointed new board members beginning in mid-2002.
In November 2002, we announced the unaudited, preliminary
expected magnitude of the anticipated restatement of our
financial statements, and updated that information on several
occasions over the subsequent eleven months. Accordingly, the
selected financial data for 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001, financial
statements for the years ended December 31, 2000 and 2001,
and unaudited selected quarterly information for each of the
four quarters of 2001 and the first three quarters of 2002 were
restated in our 2002 Annual Report on Form 10-K/ A.
In connection with our accounting practices various class action
lawsuits were filed against us and certain of our former
management and our former board of directors in March 2002,
March 2003 and May 2003. For more information see
Securities litigation matters.
On June 3, 2004, we announced that we resolved the
investigation by the Eastern District relating to our past
accounting practices by entering into a non-prosecution
agreement with the Eastern District. As a result of this
non-prosecution agreement, no criminal complaint will be filed
against us. In addition, on June 3, 2004, we announced an
agreement with the SEC to resolve allegations against us
relating to our past accounting practices that were under
investigation by the SEC. Pursuant to the agreements with the
Eastern District and the SEC, we have paid a total of
$37 million in cash to a restitution fund for members of
the class consisting of purchasers of our common stock from
February 15, 2000 to October 17, 2002, and
$3 million to the United States Postal Inspection Service
Consumer Fraud Fund. In addition to these payments, the
non-prosecution agreement included an acknowledgement by us that
between 1999 and 2002, as a result of the actions of certain of
our former employees, we (a) violated federal criminal law
in connection with accounting practices involving improper sales
transactions, unsupported and fictitious accounting entries and
the manipulation of our accounting reserves and expenses; and
(b) filed and caused to be filed materially false and
misleading financial statements and other documents with the
SEC. As part of the non-prosecution agreement, we agreed to
continue our cooperation with the Eastern District and the SEC,
and to implement remedial measures, including, but not limited
to, retaining an independent, government-approved examiner to
review our internal controls, financial reporting practices and
our compliance with the settlement agreements and establishing
and maintaining an annual training and education program
designed to diminish the possibility of future violations of the
federal securities laws. If we violate the agreement with the
Eastern District or the injunction with the SEC or commit or
attempt to commit other violations, such as accounting offenses
that were not the subject of
38
the investigations, we will be subject to federal criminal
charges. Pursuant to the non-prosecution agreement we have
waived certain defenses that may have otherwise been available
to us in the event of a federal criminal charge, including the
statute of limitations, and will be subject to prosecution for
any offense, including any offense related to our past
accounting practices. In addition, in the event of a violation
of the agreement and a federal criminal charge, statements that
were made by or on behalf of us to the Eastern District, SEC and
the Postal Inspection Service, including the acknowledgments of
responsibility described above, will be deemed admissible in
evidence and certain evidentiary rules will not be available to
us. Pursuant to the agreement with the SEC, the SEC filed, and
the court has approved, a Final Consent Judgment in the Eastern
District of New York providing for injunctive relief, enjoining
us from further violations of the antifraud, reporting, books
and records and internal control provisions of the federal
securities laws, and a civil penalty in the amount of
$37 million, as described above. We paid both the
$37 million and the $3 million to the United States
Postal Inspection Service Consumer Fraud Fund prior to
June 30, 2004.
On October 26, 2004, the Company issued a press release
announcing its financial results for the third quarter 2004. On
November 8, 2004, the Company issued a second press
release, revising certain of the previously reported numbers.
The revised numbers included a reduction of approximately
$13.6 million in revenue for the nine months ending
September 30, 2004, as compared to the results previously
reported in the press release of October 26, 2004. The
November 8, 2004 press release stated that the Company had
discovered certain discrepancies in the amount of inventory at a
distributor as well as inventory on hand that affected its
previously-announced results. On November 15, 2004,
the Company filed its Form 10-Q for the third quarter of
2004.
The non-prosecution agreement between the Company and the United
States Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of New
York, described previously, provides that should the Company
violate the agreement or commit a crime in the future, the
Company would be subject to prosecution for any offense,
including any offense related to the Companys past
accounting practices. The Company has retained outside counsel
to investigate the facts and circumstances surrounding the
erroneous numbers included in the October 26, 2004 press
release. The Company has been cooperating with the informal
requests made by the Eastern District and by the SEC regarding
this matter, including whether Symbol has complied with the
injunction entered into in connection with its June 2004
settlement with the SEC and non-prosecution agreement with the
Eastern District. There can be no assurance that these events
will not give rise to an enforcement action or other proceeding
brought by the Eastern District or the SEC.
Securities litigation matters
On June 3, 2004, we announced our settlement of the
Pinkowitz, Hoyle and Salerno class action lawsuits, which are
described below. Under the settlement, we agreed to pay to the
class members an aggregate of $1.75 million in cash and an
aggregate number of shares of common stock having a market value
of $96.25 million, subject to a minimum and maximum number
of shares based upon the volume-weighted moving average trading
price of our common stock for the five day period immediately
prior to our payment of the common stock to the class
(Determined Price). If the Determined Price is
greater than $16.41 per share, then we will issue
5,865.3 shares of our common stock to the class. If the
Determined Price is between $16.41 per share and
$11.49 per share, then we will issue to the class the
number of shares of common stock equal to a market value of
$96.25 million divided by the Determined Price. If the
Determined Price is less than $11.49 per share, we will
issue 8,376.8 shares of our common stock to the class. The
settlement also provides that we have the right to pay up to an
additional $6.0 million in cash to reduce the number of
shares of our common stock that we are required to deliver in an
amount equal to the amount of additional cash divided by the
Determined Price. If (i) there occurs any event that would
lead to the de-listing of our common stock or our board of
directors recommends the approval of a tender offer or the
purchase of a majority of our common stock or (ii) the
Determined Price is less than $11.90 per share, then the
lead counsel for the plaintiffs can require us to place into
escrow the number of shares that would otherwise be payable to
the class and would have the right to sell all or any portion of
the escrowed shares and invest such proceeds until distribution
to the class. If we do not deliver our common stock as required
by the settlement agreement within the ten days of such
requirement, the lead counsel for the plaintiffs may terminate
the settlement
39
agreement. The court held a fairness hearing regarding the
settlement on October 4, 2004 and approved the fairness of
the settlement by an order entered on October 20, 2004. On
November 17, 2004, we delivered 586,500 shares, or 10%
of the settlement amount (at $16.41 per share), as
satisfaction of the plaintiffs attorneys fees,
pursuant to the courts order. We expect to deliver the
balance of the shares required to be issued under the settlement
of 5,278.8 shares in the first half of 2005. As of
December 31, 2004, the Company has reflected
$86.625 million as accrued litigation costs in its current
liabilities. For every $1.00 per share above
$16.41 per share on the date the shares are issued, an
additional non-cash litigation charge of approximately
$5.3 million (pre-tax) and $3.2 million (after-tax)
will be required to be recorded in our statements of operations
in 2005.
In addition to the payments described above, the
$37 million civil penalty imposed by the SEC, which we have
already paid, will be distributed to the class. Also, as part of
the settlement, Dr. Jerome Swartz, our co-founder and
former chairman, has paid $4 million in cash to the class
to settle the claims against him in the Pinkowitz and Hoyle
class action lawsuits.
|
|
|
Pinkowitz v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al. |
On March 5, 2002, a class action lawsuit was filed in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New
York on behalf of purchasers of our common stock between
October 19, 2000 and February 13, 2002, inclusive,
against us and certain members of our former management and our
former board of directors. The complaint alleged that the
defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing
materially false and misleading statements throughout the class
period that had the effect of artificially inflating the market
price of our securities. This case is subject to the settlement
agreement described above.
|
|
|
Hoyle v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al. |
|
|
|
Salerno v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al. |
On March 21, 2003, a class action lawsuit was filed in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New
York against us and certain members of our former management and
our former board of directors. On May 7, 2003, a virtually
identical class action lawsuit was filed against the same
defendants by Joseph Salerno.
The Hoyle and Salerno complaints were brought on behalf of a
class of former shareholders of Telxon Corporation
(Telxon) who obtained our common stock in exchange
for their Telxon stock in connection with our acquisition of
Telxon in November 2000. The complaint alleges that the
defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing a
Registration Statement and Joint Proxy Statement/ Prospectus in
connection with the Telxon acquisition that contained materially
false and misleading statements that had the effect of
artificially inflating the market price of our securities. These
cases are subject to the settlement agreement described above.
Smart Media litigation
|
|
|
Telxon v. Smart Media of Delaware, Inc. |
On December 1, 1998, Telxon filed suit against Smart Media
of Delaware, Inc. (SMI) in the Court of Common Pleas
for Summit County, Ohio in a case seeking a declaratory judgment
that Telxon did not contract to develop SMIs products or
invest approximately $3 million in SMIs business and
that it did not fraudulently induce SMI to refrain from engaging
in business with others or interfere with SMIs business
relationships. On March 12, 1999, SMI filed its answer and
counterclaim denying Telxons allegations and alleging
counterclaims against Telxon for negligent misrepresentation,
estoppel, tortious interference with business relationship and
intentional misrepresentation and seeking approximately
$10 million in compensatory damages, punitive damages, fees
and costs. In addition, William Dupre, an individual employed by
SMI at that time, asserted similar counterclaims against Telxon.
In November 2000, Symbol acquired Telxon with these claims still
pending.
40
On September 17, 2003, the jury awarded approximately
$218 million in damages against Telxon, of which
approximately $6 million was awarded to Mr. Dupre. The
court denied Telxons motions for judgment in its favor
notwithstanding the verdict, for a new trial and for a reduction
in the amount of the jury verdicts. On May 6, 2004, the
court entered judgment against Telxon for approximately
$218 million in damages, plus statutory interest from the
date of the verdicts and granted a motion to add Symbol as a
counterclaim defendant with respect to the counterclaims
asserted by Mr. Dupre. Prior to these court rulings, SMI
withdrew its motion to add Symbol as a counterclaim defendant
with respect to the counterclaims asserted by SMI. We and Telxon
have filed notices of appeal of these rulings and the related
verdicts. Symbol and Telxon have deposited approximately
$50 million into an interest-bearing court escrow account
to stay execution of the judgment against both Symbol and Telxon
pending resolution of the appeal. Symbol and Telxon have filed
their opening briefs on appeal. SMI and Mr. Dupre filed
their responsive briefs on January 31, 2005 and
Symbol and Telxon are due to respond on or before March 15,
2005.
Our available cash, including cash available under our existing
lines of credit, may not be sufficient to pay jury verdicts of
this size and we would need to obtain additional financing in
order to pay the judgment entered against Telxon in this matter.
In addition, we currently have not recorded any liability in our
consolidated financial statements with respect to the jury
verdicts and the judgment entered as we believe that, in
accordance with the relevant guidance set forth in Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 5, Accounting for
Contingencies, an unfavorable outcome of this litigation
is not probable at this time. However, there can be no assurance
that we will not be found to be ultimately liable for the full
amount of the judgment, plus statutory interest from the date of
the verdicts. In the event we are found liable, and the judgment
is not paid, we would be in violation of the terms of our new
credit facility. See Item 7. Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations Existing indebtedness.
Pending patent and trademark litigation
|
|
|
Metrologic Instruments, Inc. v. Symbol Technologies,
Inc. |
On June 19, 2003, Metrologic Instruments, Inc.
(Metrologic) filed a complaint against us in the
United States District Court, District of New Jersey, alleging
patent infringement and breach of contract, and seeking monetary
damages of $2.3 million (as of March 31, 2004) and
termination of the cross-licensing agreement between the
parties. We answered the complaint and asserted counterclaims
for declaratory judgments of invalidity and noninfringement of
Metrologics patents and for non-breach of the
cross-licensing agreement. We intend to defend the case
vigorously on the merits.
|
|
|
Symbol Technologies, Inc. et al. v. Lemelson
Medical, Educational & Research Foundation, Limited
Partnership |
On July 21, 1999, we and six other members of the Automatic
Identification and Data Capture industry (Auto ID
Companies) jointly initiated a lawsuit against the
Lemelson Medical, Educational, & Research Foundation,
Limited Partnership (Lemelson Partnership). The suit
was commenced in the United States District Court, District of
Nevada in Reno, Nevada, but was subsequently transferred to the
federal court in Las Vegas, Nevada. In the litigation, the Auto
ID Companies seek, among other remedies, a declaration that
certain patents, which have been asserted by the Lemelson
Partnership against end users of bar code equipment, are
invalid, unenforceable and not infringed.
The Lemelson Partnership has contacted many of the Auto ID
Companies customers demanding a one-time license fee for
certain so-called bar code patents transferred to
the Lemelson Partnership by the late Jerome H. Lemelson. We have
received many requests from our customers asking that we
undertake the defense of these claims using our knowledge of the
technology at issue, and the other Auto ID Companies have
received similar requests. Certain of our customers have
requested indemnification against the Lemelson
Partnerships claims from us, and certain customers of the
other Auto ID Companies have requested similar indemnification
from them, individually and/or collectively with other equipment
suppliers. We believe that generally we have no obligation to
indemnify our customers against these claims and that the
patents being
41
asserted by the Lemelson Partnership against our customers with
respect to bar code equipment are invalid, unenforceable and not
infringed.
On January 23, 2004, the court concluded that
Lemelsons patent claims are unenforceable under the
equitable doctrine of prosecution laches; that the asserted
patent claims as construed by the court are not infringed by us
because use of the accused products does not satisfy one or more
of the limitations of each and every asserted claim; and that
the claims are invalid for lack of enablement even if construed
in the manner urged by Lemelson. The court entered its judgment
in favor of Symbol and the other Auto ID Companies on
January 23, 2004. The Lemelson Partnership filed several
post-trial motions all of which were denied by the court. The
Lemelson Partnership filed a notice of appeal on June 23,
2004. Briefs on appeal have been filed by the parties.
|
|
|
Intermec IP Corp. v. Matrics, Inc. |
On June 7, 2004, Intermec IP Corp. (Intermec)
filed suit against Matrics in the Federal District Court in
Delaware asserting infringement of four patents owned by
Intermec relating to RFID readers and RFID tags. The complaint
against Matrics seeks payment of a reasonable
royalty as well as an injunction against Matrics from
infringing such patents. On September 9, 2004, Symbol
consummated the acquisition of Matrics. Matrics was merged into
Symbol on October 29, 2004, and accordingly, Symbol is
defending the case vigorously on the merits.
|
|
|
Nanopower Technologies, Inc. v. Symbol Technologies,
Inc. and Matrics Technology Systems, Inc. |
On August 11, 2004, Nanopower Technologies, Inc.
(Nanopower), a California corporation, filed a civil
suit against Matrics and Symbol in state court in California.
The suit alleges that Matrics breached a consulting agreement,
confidentiality agreement and intellectual property licensing
agreement pertaining to certain ultra low voltage RFID tag
start-up technology to which Nanopower claims ownership and that
the defendants violated California state law relating to the
protection of trade secrets. The suit also named Symbol as a
defendant because of Symbols announced intention to
purchase Matrics. Nanopower alleges that Symbol (i) has
improperly received disclosure of Nanopowers confidential
information, (ii) has, or will, misappropriate
Nanopowers trade secrets as a consequence of the
acquisition of Matrics and (iii) will benefit from the
alleged breaches of the intellectual property licensing and
consulting agreements. On September 9, 2004, Symbol
consummated the acquisition of Matrics. Matrics was merged into
Symbol on October 29, 2004, and accordingly, Symbol is
defending the case vigorously on the merits.
Matrics agreements with Nanopower provide for mandatory
arbitration of these disputes in Washington, DC and contain an
exclusive venue clause requiring any effort to obtain injunctive
relief to be filed in Maryland. The state court complaint was
removed to federal court and Matrics has filed a motion to
transfer the suit to Maryland in anticipation of a subsequent
stay pending arbitration. On October 1, 2004, before the
Court heard Matrics motion, Nanopower agreed to and the
parties filed a stipulation to stay the case pending mediation,
and if necessary, arbitration.
Other litigation
|
|
|
Barcode Systems, Inc. v. Symbol Technologies Canada,
Inc. and Symbol Technologies, Inc. |
On March 19, 2003, Barcode Systems, Inc. (BSI)
filed an amended statement of claim in the Court of Queens
Bench in Winnipeg, Canada, naming Symbol Technologies Canada,
Inc. and Symbol as defendants. BSI alleges that we deliberately,
maliciously and willfully breached our agreement with BSI under
which BSI purported to have the right to sell our products in
western Canada and to supply Symbols support operations
for western Canada. BSI has claimed damages in an unspecified
amount, punitive damages and special damages.
Symbol denies BSIs allegations and claims that it properly
terminated any agreements between BSI and Symbol. Additionally,
Symbol filed a counterclaim against BSI alleging trademark
infringement, depreciation
42
of the value of the goodwill attached to Symbols trademark
and damages in the sum of Canadian $1.3 million,
representing the unpaid balance of products sold by Symbol to
BSI. Discovery in the matter is ongoing.
On October 30, 2003, BSI filed an Application For Leave
with the Canadian Competition Tribunal (Tribunal).
BSI is seeking an Order from the Tribunal that would require us
to accept BSI as a customer on the usual trade terms
as they existed prior to the termination of their agreement in
April 2003. The Tribunal granted leave for BSI to proceed with
its claim against us on January 15, 2004. We filed an
appeal of the Tribunals decision before the Federal Court
of Appeals on January 26, 2004, and a brief in support of
the appeal on April 22, 2004. On October 7, 2004, the
Federal Court of Appeals dismissed Symbols appeal,
allowing BSI to make its application before the Tribunal against
Symbol.
On November 17, 2003, BSI filed an additional lawsuit in
British Columbia, Canada against us and a number of our
distributors alleging that we refused to sell products to BSI,
conspired with the other defendants to do the same and used
confidential information to interfere with BSIs business.
We intend to defend against these claims vigorously.
|
|
|
Lic. Olegario Cavazos Cantu, on behalf of Maria Leonor Cepeda
Zapata vs. Symbol de Mexico, Sociedad de R.L. de C.V. |
Lic. Olegario Cavazos Cantu, on behalf of Maria Leonor Cepeda
Zapata filed a lawsuit against Symbol de Mexico, Sociedad de
R.L. de C.V. (Symbol Mexico) in October 2003 to
reclaim property on which our Reynosa facility is located. The
lawsuit was filed before the First Civil Judge of First
Instance, 5th Judicial District, in Reynosa, Tamaulipas, Mexico.
The First Civil Judge ordered the recording of a lis pendens
with respect to this litigation before the Public Register of
Property in Cd. Victoria, Tamaulipas.
The plaintiff alleges that she is the legal owner of a tract of
land of 100 hectares, located within the area comprising the
Rancho La Alameda, Municipality of Reynosa, Tamaulipas,
within the Bajo Rio San Juan, Tamaulipas, irrigation
district. The plaintiff is asking the court to order Symbol
Mexico to physically and legally deliver to the plaintiff the
portion of land occupied by Symbol Mexico.
Symbol Mexico acquired title to the lots in the Parque
Industrial Reynosa from Edificadora Jarachina, S.A. de C.V.
pursuant to a deed instrument. An Owners Policy of
Title Insurance was issued by Stewart Title Guaranty
Company in connection with the above-mentioned transaction in
the amount of $13.4 million. A Notice of Claim and Request
for Defense of Litigation was duly delivered on behalf of Symbol
to Stewart Title Guaranty Company on November 4, 2003.
In late November 2004, the First Level Civil Judge entered
a final judgment in this matter for Symbol. In his decision, the
judge held that, while the plaintiff had established she had
title to a tract of land, she failed to establish that her
parcel is the property on which Symbols Reynosa
manufacturing facility is located. The judge further held that,
based on the plaintiffs complaint, it was not possible to
identify the location of the property to which plaintiff claims
title.
The plaintiff has appealed the judgment to the Court of Second
Instance.
|
|
|
Bruck Technologies Handels GmbH European Commission
Complaint |
In February 2004, we became aware of a notice from the European
Competition Commission (EC) of a complaint lodged
with it by Bruck Technologies Handels GmbH (Bruck)
that certain provisions of the Symbol
PartnerSelecttm
program violate Article 81 of the EC Treaty. Bruck has
asked the EC to impose unspecified sanctions. We have provided
all information initially requested by the EC and will respond
to any additional inquiries. No action has been taken and the
matter is pending. We intend to defend against these claims
vigorously.
43
Securities litigation matters in which Symbol has been
realigned as plaintiff
|
|
|
Bildstein v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al. |
On April 29, 2003, a shareholder derivative lawsuit was
filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of New York against certain members of our former
management and board of directors and against Symbol as a
nominal defendant. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants
violated Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder and common and
state law by authorizing the distribution of proxy statements in
2000, 2001 and 2002. Plaintiff sought the cancellation of all
affirmative votes at the annual meetings for 2000, 2001 and
2002, the cancellation of all awards under the option plans
approved pursuant to those proxy statements, an injunction
preventing the implementation of those option plans and all
awards thereunder and an accounting by the defendants for all
injuries and damages suffered by Symbol, plus all costs and
expenses, including but not limited to attorneys fees,
incurred in connection with the action.
In September 2004, the court approved a settlement that Symbol
reached with the plaintiff. As part of the settlement, Symbol
and the plaintiffs agreed to a stipulation pursuant to which
Symbol was realigned as plaintiff, and the action dismissed
without prejudice so as to permit Symbol to pursue the claims
asserted in this case and in the Gold litigation described
below. As part of the stipulation, Symbol agreed to pay and has
since paid $120,000 to Bildsteins counsel for services
rendered in the case.
|
|
|
Gold v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al. |
On December 18, 2003, a derivative action lawsuit was filed
in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against Symbol
and certain of our former senior management. The complaint
alleges that the defendants violated the federal securities laws
by issuing materially false and misleading statements from
January 1, 1998 through December 31, 2002 that had the
effect of artificially inflating the market price of
Symbols securities and that the defendants (1) failed
to properly oversee or implement policies, procedures and rules
to ensure compliance with federal and state laws requiring the
dissemination of accurate financial statements, which ultimately
caused Symbol to be sued for, and exposed to liability for,
violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the federal
securities laws, (2) engaged in insider trading in
Symbols common stock, (3) wasted corporate assets and
(4) improperly awarded a severance of approximately
$13 million to Tomo Razmilovic, one of our former
Presidents and Chief Executive Officers. Plaintiff sought to
recover incentive-based compensation paid to certain of our
former senior management in reliance on materially inflated
financial statements and to impose a trust to recover cash and
other valuable assets received by the former senior management
defendants and former Symbol board members.
On July 27, 2004, the court approved a settlement that
Symbol reached with the plaintiff. The settlement calls for the
lawsuit to continue as direct litigation by Symbol on its own
behalf against the defendants. As part of the settlement, the
plaintiff consents to entry of Symbols proposed order
under which Symbol will now be the plaintiff in the case. Symbol
plans to continue to pursue this lawsuit vigorously and, as part
of the settlement, has agreed to pay $185,000 to cover the
reasonable legal fees of the plaintiffs lawyers.
On October 28, 2004, Symbol filed its amended complaint in
the action, naming Mr. Razmilovic as the defendant. By
Order dated November 9, 2004, the Court stayed the action
against Mr. Razmilovic pending the resolution of the
Governments criminal case against
Mr. Razmilovics co-defendants. In addition, on
November 9, 2004, Symbol filed a complaint in the United
States District Court, Eastern District of New York against
certain other former officers and employees in connection with
their past employment at Symbol and the facts and circumstances
that led to the Companys restatement. On November 19,
2004, the Court issued a stay, pending the resolution of the
governments criminal action against the defendants.
|
|
Item 4. |
Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security
Holders. |
No matters were submitted to a vote of our stockholders during
the fourth quarter of fiscal 2004.
44
|
|
Item 4A. |
Executive Officers of the Registrant. |
The following table sets forth the names, positions and offices
held by Symbols executive officers as of December 31,
2004 and their ages as of the date of this report:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Age | |
|
Position |
|
|
| |
|
|
William R. Nuti
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director |
Todd A. Abbott
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
Senior Vice President Worldwide Operations |
John G. Bruno
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
Senior Vice President Corporate Development |
Carole M.
DeMayo1
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
Senior Vice President Global Human Resources |
Mark T. Greenquist
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
Senior Vice President Finance and Chief Financial
Officer |
Todd G. Hewlin
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
Senior Vice President Global Products Group |
Peter M. Lieb
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary |
Arthur J. ODonnell
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
Senior Vice President Global Services Division and
Chief Quality Officer |
James M. Conboy
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
Vice President, Controller and Chief Accounting Officer |
(1) Resignation effective February 15, 2005.
Mr. Nuti was appointed President, Chief Executive
Officer and director in December 2003. Prior to
Mr. Nutis appointment as Chief Executive Officer, he
served as President and Chief Operating Officer from July 2002
through December 2003. Mr. Nuti joined Symbol from Cisco
Systems, Inc., where he was Senior Vice President of
U.S. Theatre and Worldwide Service Provider Operations,
responsible for Ciscos field operations, systems
engineering, professional services and marketing for the global
service provider arena. In his 10-year career at Cisco,
Mr. Nuti served as President of EMEA operations, Senior
Vice President for Worldwide Service Provider operations, Vice
President for Cisco Asia Pacific Region and in various sales
management positions.
Mr. Abbott has served as our Senior Vice
President Worldwide Operations since April 2004.
Prior to Mr. Abbotts appointment as Senior Vice
President Worldwide Operations, he served Symbol as
our Senior Vice President Worldwide Sales from
November 2002 and to April 2004. Mr. Abbott joined Symbol
from Cisco Systems, Inc., where he was most recently Group Vice
President of Cisco EMEA Service Provider Sales, a position he
held for three years. Prior to that, Mr. Abbott served as
Ciscos Vice President of Asian operations for
18 months and for 18 months prior to that he served as
Ciscos Operations Director for Southeast Asia.
Mr. Bruno serves as our Senior Vice
President Corporate Development. Mr. Bruno
joined Symbol as its Senior Vice President Business
Development and Chief Information Officer in November 2002 from
Cisco Systems, Inc. At Cisco Systems, Inc. he served as Vice
President of Technology Marketing and Vice President of
Information Technology from June 2000 to November 2002. Prior to
that, Mr. Bruno served as Executive Director of Information
Technology for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Inc. from September 1998 to
June 2000 and as Director of Information Technology at United
Parcel Service from August 1990 to September 1998.
Ms. DeMayo worked in various human resource
positions at Symbol for over eight years, and served as
Symbols Senior Vice President Global Human
Resources from July 2001 to February 2005.
Mr. Greenquist joined Symbol as its Senior Vice
President Finance and Chief Financial Officer in
February 2003 from Agere Systems, Inc., where he was Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer from January 2001 to
January 2003, responsible for executive management and the
oversight of its financial operations. Before joining Agere
Systems, Mr. Greenquist was based in Zurich, Switzerland,
with General
45
Motors Europe as Vice President of Finance and Chief Financial
Officer. In 1986, he joined the New York General Motors finance
organization and held a number of positions in GMs New
York Treasurers Office, including corporate finance,
capital markets, foreign exchange and commodity hedging and
investor relations.
Mr. Hewlin joined Symbol as its Senior Vice
President Global Products Group in June 2003 from
The Chasm Group, LLC where he served as a Managing Director
since May 2001. Prior to joining The Chasm Group, LLC he was a
Managing Director at Internet Capital Group from July 1999 to
May 2001 and before that he was a partner at McKinsey &
Co., where he served as co-head of its Global Electronic
Commerce Practice.
Mr. Lieb joined Symbol as its Senior Vice President,
General Counsel and Secretary in October 2003 from International
Paper Company, where he served in various senior legal positions
including Deputy General Counsel and Chief Counsel for
litigation from September 1997 to October 2003. Prior to his
tenure at International Paper Company, Mr. Lieb was
Assistant General Counsel for GTE Service Corporation, a
litigation partner at Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue and
served as an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern
District of New York. Early in his legal career, Mr. Lieb
served as a law clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice
Warren Burger.
Mr. ODonnell serves as our Senior Vice
President Global Services Division and Chief Quality
Officer. Mr. ODonnell joined Symbol in July 2003 from
Solectron Global Services, where he had served for the previous
three years as President and Chief Operating Officer of the
Solectron Americas Global Services organization. Prior to that,
Mr. ODonnell was Vice President of Services at GTECH
Holdings Corporation from 1998 to 2000 and held positions in
operations and functional and managerial roles in services,
manufacturing and engineering at Digital Equipment Corporation
and Compaq Computer Corp. over a 25-year period.
Mr. Conboy joined Symbol as its Vice President,
Controller and Chief Accounting Officer in February 2004 from
D.P. Healy CPA, P.C., a forensic accounting firm, where he
was a director from January 2003 to February 2004. Since March
2003, Mr. Conboy assisted Symbol, in the capacity as a
consultant, in various accounting matters related to the
restatement of our previously issued financial statements. From
January 2000 to December 2002, Mr. Conboy held positions at
AT&T Corp. as Financial V.P. Internal Auditing
and Corporate Security and Assistant Corporate Controller.
Before joining AT&T Corp., Mr. Conboy was based in
Zurich, Switzerland with General Motors Europe as Chief
Accounting Officer from June 1998 to December 1999.
46
Part II
|
|
Item 5. |
Market for the Registrants Common Equity, Related
Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity
Securities. |
Price range of common stock
Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under
the trading symbol SBL. The following tables set
forth, for each quarter period of the last two years and for the
first quarter of 2005 through March 9, 2005, the high and
low sales prices as reported by the New York Stock Exchange and
the dividend payments declared by the Board of Directors and
paid by Symbol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High | |
|
Low | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Year ended December 31, 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$ |
10.95 |
|
|
$ |
8.01 |
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
14.93 |
|
|
|
8.62 |
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
14.88 |
|
|
|
11.54 |
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
17.70 |
|
|
|
11.94 |
|
Year ended December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
|
19.37 |
|
|
|
11.89 |
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
15.89 |
|
|
|
11.30 |
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
14.75 |
|
|
|
11.55 |
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
17.50 |
|
|
|
12.59 |
|
Year ended December 31, 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter (through March 9, 2005)
|
|
|
19.12 |
|
|
|
15.29 |
|
On March 9, 2005, the closing price of Symbols common
stock was $15.80. As of March 9, 2005, there were 1,622
holders of record of Symbols common stock, which did not
include beneficial owners of shares registered in nominee or
street name.
Dividend policy
The following table sets forth the dividend payments declared by
the board of directors and paid by Symbol with respect to the
periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividend | |
|
|
| |
Year ended December 31, 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
.01 |
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
.01 |
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
|
.01 |
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
|
.01 |
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter (through March 9, 2005)
|
|
|
|
|
Payment of future dividends is subject to approval by our board
of directors. Recurrent declaration of dividends will be
dependent on our future earnings, capital requirements and
financial condition. The terms of our new credit facility may
also restrict us from paying cash dividends on our common stock
under some circumstances. See Item 7.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition
and Results of Operations Existing
Indebtedeness.
47
|
|
Item 6. |
Selected Financial Data. |
The following table sets forth selected consolidated financial
information of Symbol for each of the years in the five-year
period ended December 31, 2004. These tables should be read
in conjunction with our Consolidated Financial Statements,
including the notes thereto, appearing elsewhere in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K and Item 7,
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2000 | |
|
2001 | |
|
2002(1) | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, except per share) | |
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
$ |
1,005,787 |
|
|
$ |
1,206,176 |
|
|
$ |
1,103,070 |
|
|
$ |
1,223,853 |
|
|
$ |
1,433,671 |
|
Services
|
|
|
207,476 |
|
|
|
281,280 |
|
|
|
298,547 |
|
|
|
306,425 |
|
|
|
298,452 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenue
|
|
|
1,213,263 |
|
|
|
1,487,456 |
|
|
|
1,401,617 |
|
|
|
1,530,278 |
|
|
|
1,732,123 |
|
Cost of Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product cost of revenue
|
|
|
658,149 |
|
|
|
826,766 |
|
|
|
693,980 |
|
|
|
635,103 |
|
|
|
709,967 |
|
Services cost of revenue
|
|
|
162,709 |
|
|
|
219,310 |
|
|
|
219,985 |
|
|
|
219,926 |
|
|
|
213,118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of revenue
|
|
|
820,858 |
|
|
|
1,046,076 |
|
|
|
913,965 |
|
|
|
855,029 |
|
|
|
923,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
392,405 |
|
|
|
441,380 |
|
|
|
487,652 |
|
|
|
675,249 |
|
|
|
809,038 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Engineering
|
|
|
127,740 |
|
|
|
149,523 |
|
|
|
142,602 |
|
|
|
156,328 |
|
|
|
167,543 |
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
326,117 |
|
|
|
329,044 |
|
|
|
343,971 |
|
|
|
421,132 |
|
|
|
502,331 |
|
Stock-based compensation expense/(recovery)
|
|
|
9,402 |
|
|
|
(92,760 |
) |
|
|
(68,084 |
) |
|
|
17,087 |
|
|
|
2,234 |
|
Provision/(recovery) for legal settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
98,300 |
|
|
|
72,000 |
|
|
|
(21,400 |
) |
Restructuring and impairment charges
|
|
|
4,761 |
|
|
|
10,218 |
|
|
|
2,590 |
|
|
|
1,181 |
|
|
|
5,170 |
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
87,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,800 |
|
Merger integration charges
|
|
|
6,785 |
|
|
|
9,238 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of goodwill
|
|
|
6,347 |
|
|
|
14,823 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
568,752 |
|
|
|
420,086 |
|
|
|
519,379 |
|
|
|
667,728 |
|
|
|
668,678 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings/(loss) from operations
|
|
|
(176,347 |
) |
|
|
21,294 |
|
|
|
(31,727 |
) |
|
|
7,521 |
|
|
|
140,360 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other (Expense)/ Income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
4,484 |
|
|
|
2,876 |
|
|
|
2,322 |
|
|
|
2,969 |
|
|
|
3,507 |
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(19,405 |
) |
|
|
(22,145 |
) |
|
|
(16,801 |
) |
|
|
(10,590 |
) |
|
|
(20,032 |
) |
Impairment of investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23,757 |
) |
|
|
(32,200 |
) |
|
|
(3,550 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,177 |
|
|
|
16,676 |
|
|
|
7,551 |
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,921 |
) |
|
|
(38,849 |
) |
|
|
(30,003 |
) |
|
|
(3,620 |
) |
|
|
(16,591 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings/(loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(191,268 |
) |
|
|
(17,555 |
) |
|
|
(61,730 |
) |
|
|
3,901 |
|
|
|
123,769 |
|
Provision for/(benefit from) income taxes
|
|
|
(53,602 |
) |
|
|
214 |
|
|
|
(16,815 |
) |
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
41,922 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings/(loss)
|
|
$ |
(137,666 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,769 |
) |
|
$ |
(44,915 |
) |
|
$ |
3,295 |
|
|
$ |
81,847 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings/(Loss) Per Share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
(0.67 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.08 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.34 |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
(0.67 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.08 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
0.33 |
|
Weighted Average Number of Common Shares Outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
206,347 |
|
|
|
227,173 |
|
|
|
229,593 |
|
|
|
230,710 |
|
|
|
242,469 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
206,347 |
|
|
|
227,173 |
|
|
|
229,593 |
|
|
|
236,449 |
|
|
|
246,166 |
|
48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2000 | |
|
2001 | |
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data) | |
Balance Sheet Data (at end of period):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
52,624 |
|
|
$ |
70,365 |
|
|
$ |
76,121 |
|
|
$ |
150,017 |
|
|
$ |
217,641 |
|
Total assets
|
|
|
2,009,041 |
|
|
|
1,705,371 |
|
|
|
1,572,195 |
|
|
|
1,646,518 |
|
|
|
1,930,369 |
|
Long-term debt, less current portion
|
|
|
201,144 |
|
|
|
220,521 |
|
|
|
135,614 |
|
|
|
99,012 |
|
|
|
176,087 |
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
1,092,588 |
|
|
|
999,115 |
|
|
|
887,739 |
|
|
|
920,598 |
|
|
|
1,072,519 |
|
Cash dividends per share(2)
|
|
$ |
0.0144 |
|
|
$ |
0.0167 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
$ |
0.02 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Symbol changed its method of accounting for goodwill and other
intangibles effective January 1, 2002. |
|
(2) |
Adjusted to reflect three-for-two stock splits that became
effective on April 16, 2001, April 5, 2000 and
June 14, 1999. |
|
|
Item 7. |
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations. |
(Dollar amounts in thousands, except per share data)
Forward-Looking Statements
This report contains forward-looking statements as defined in
Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and
Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended. These statements may be identified by their use of
words, such as anticipate, estimates,
should, expect, guidance,
project, intend, plan,
believe and other words and terms of similar
meaning, in connection with any discussion of our future
business, results of operations, liquidity and operating or
financial performance or results. Such forward-looking
statements involve significant material known and unknown risks,
uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual
results, performance or achievements to be materially different
from any future results, performance or achievements expressed
or implied by such forward looking statements. These and other
important risk factors are included under the caption Risk
Factors beginning on page 22 of this report. In light
of the uncertainty inherent in such forward-looking statements,
you should not consider the inclusion of such forward-looking
statements to be a representation that such forward-looking
events or outcomes will occur.
Because the information herein is based solely on data currently
available, it is subject to change and should not be viewed as
providing any assurance regarding our future performance. Actual
results and performance may differ from our current projections,
estimates and expectations, and the differences may be material,
individually or in the aggregate, to our business, financial
condition, results of operations, liquidity or prospects.
Additionally, we are not obligated to make public indication of
changes in our forward-looking statements unless required under
applicable disclosure rules and regulations.
Overview
We are a recognized worldwide leader in enterprise mobility,
delivering products and solutions that capture, move and manage
information in real time to and from the point of business
activity. Symbol enterprise mobility solutions integrate
advanced data capture products, mobile computing platforms,
wireless infrastructure, mobility software and services programs
under the Symbol Enterprise Mobility Services brand. Our goal is
to be one of the worlds preeminent suppliers of
mission-critical mobile computing solutions to both business and
industrial users. For the year ended December 31, 2004, we
generated $1,732,123 of revenue.
Symbol manufactures products and provides services to capture,
move and manage data using five core technologies: bar code
reading and image recognition, mobile computing, wireless
networking systems, RFID and mobility software applications. Our
products and services are sold to a broad and diverse base of
49
customers on a worldwide basis and in diverse markets such as
retail, transportation, parcel and postal delivery services,
warehousing and distribution, manufacturing, healthcare,
hospitality, security, education and government. We do not
depend upon a single customer, or a few customers, the loss of
which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
We operate in two reportable business segments: (1) the
design, manufacture and marketing of advanced data capture,
mobile computing, wireless infrastructure, RFID and mobility
software (Product Segment) and (2) the
servicing of, customer support for and professional services
related to these systems (Services Segment). Each of
our operating segments uses its core competencies to provide
building blocks for mobile computing solutions.
We are focused on delivering to our customers our enterprise
mobility products, solutions and services, which are designed to
increase cost-effectiveness, enhance efficiency and promote
faster execution of critical business processes. We have been
focused on the following objectives which are continuing in 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
Expanding our position in enterprise mobility products and
solutions. We believe our ability to deliver innovative,
end-to-end enterprise mobility systems gives us a competitive
advantage. Accordingly, we plan to continue to invest in product
developments. In September 2004, we made a significant strategic
acquisition of Matrics, and during 2004, we entered into
alliances to expand our capabilities in enterprise mobility
solutions with such companies as AT&T Wireless and Nextel. |
|
|
|
Continuing to improve and streamline our operations. Over
the past two years, we have restructured and reorganized our
major business functions to improve and streamline our business
processes. As part of our restructurings, we have combined our
product marketing, research and development and product
engineering teams into a single Global Products Group, moving
from a product focus to a customer-and market-centric focus and
have embarked on a program to enhance our core product lines,
which is substantially complete. In addition, we have taken
significant steps to improve our manufacturing efficiencies by
moving the majority of our manufacturing to lower cost,
company-owned and contract production facilities outside the
United States. In addition to increasing volumes, these steps
have helped lower our product cost of revenue as a percentage of
product revenue to 49.5% for the year ended December 31,
2004 as compared to 51.9% for the 2003 fiscal year and 62.9% for
the 2002 fiscal year. We plan to continue to work to improve and
streamline our business processes. |
|
|
|
Building upon our strong foundation of intellectual
property. We have and intend to continue to invest in
research and development to enable us to continue to offer high
quality, differentiated and cost-effective products to our
customers. We have expended approximately $125,100 for research
and development during the year ended December 31, 2004. |
|
|
|
Rationalizing product lines and pursuing platform-based
products. We believe that pursuing high value-added,
platform based products allow us to increase our sales and
margins. For example, on March 31, 2003, we offered 17,012
active product configurations, which we reduced to 5,034 as of
December 31, 2004. We believe this trend will continue as
we further rationalize our product lines and pursue platform
based products. |
Management continuously evaluates its financial condition and
operational performance by monitoring key performance measures
such as revenue growth, gross profit and gross profit percent,
operating income and margin, cash flow from operations, days
sales outstanding and inventory turns.
In addition to these financial and operational measures,
management has established certain other key measures to
evaluate its future business performance, such as product
bookings and product backlog as well as product sales through
its indirect channel from both value added resellers
(VARs) and distributors, and original equipment
manufacturers (OEMs). In addition, management has a
strong focus on its customer satisfaction ratings in its service
business.
By evaluating our product bookings, we are able to gain
visibility into the momentum of our expected future sales
volumes. This evaluation helps us to identify areas where we may
need to adjust our sales and
50
marketing efforts and inventory management. Our goal is to
maintain our quarterly product bookings to our actual product
revenue recognized ratio above 1.0.
In addition, we evaluate the amount of backlog of products that
we have shipped but have not recognized as revenue, as well as
those products that are awaiting shipment. This evaluation, we
believe, assists us in improving our quarterly linearity of
shipments, and improves our operational efficiencies and overall
inventory management. Our goal is to continually grow our
backlog.
We also believe that we need to build a strong partner
ecosystem, which is a key aspect in our ability to scale our
business and important in our efforts to penetrate new markets
as well as boost our presence in our existing vertical markets.
To that extent, in 2002 we began migrating to a channel-centric
business model and introduced our
PartnerSelecttm
Program. Our goal is to have over 80% of our products shipped
through our indirect channels, that is our VARs, distributors
and OEMs.
In our Services Segment, a key measure we monitor is customer
satisfaction, particularly for technical assistance and depot
service delivery. We continually conduct independent customer
satisfaction surveys, with an overall goal of achieving ratings
consistently above a 4.0 on a scale of 1.0 to 5.0, with 5.0
being the highest level of satisfaction.
We also monitor the attach rates of our service maintenance
contracts to our product sales, which we believe gives us
visibility into future growth of our services segment.
Overview of performance
Our total revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004 was
$1,732,123, an increase of 13.2% from total revenue of
$1,530,278 for the year ended December 31, 2003. Our total
revenue for the year ended December 31, 2003 was
$1,530,278, an increase of 9.2% from total revenue of $1,401,617
for the year ended December 31, 2002. These increases in
revenue were primarily attributable to expanding our available
markets, gradual strengthening in the global economy and
increased spending in the information technology sector that
resulted in growth in our Product Segment, particularly in
mobile computing.
Our gross profit as a percentage of total revenue was 46.7% for
the year ended December 31, 2004, an increase from 44.1%
for the year ended December 31, 2003. Our gross profit as a
percentage of total revenue was 44.1% for the year ended
December 31, 2003, an increase from 34.8% for the year
ended December 31, 2002. These increases were primarily due
to our increased sales of higher margin product as well as
efficiencies we have achieved in our manufacturing operations.
Also contributing to the improved operating results in 2003 was
the absence of several charges recorded during 2002 for the
impairment of certain software assets, a provision for a loss
contract, as well as severance, restructuring and
warranty-related charges. These charges aggregated $25,400 in
2002.
We are committed to and continue to invest in engineering new
products and in investing in our people, processes and systems
to expand our product offerings, to improve our control
environment and our effectiveness with our customers and our
operational efficiencies. Accordingly, our operating expenses
were $668,678 for the year ended December 31, 2004.
Our operating margins for the year ended December 31, 2004
was 8.1%. This included a negative impact on operating margin of
1.3%, related to the acquisition of Matrics on September 9,
2004.
Our cash balance increased $67,624 to $217,641 as of
December 31, 2004, compared to $150,017 as of
December 31, 2003. Our net cash provided by operating
activities for the year ended December 31, 2004 was
$224,519, compared to $233,765 for the year ended
December 31, 2003.
We continue to focus on effectively managing our net accounts
receivables. At December 31, 2004, receivables were
$113,658 a decrease of $38,719 from $152,377 at
December 31, 2003. Our days sales outstanding at
December 31, 2004 were 23 days as compared to
35 days at December 31, 2003.
51
Our inventory turns increased to 4.5 from 3.9 for the year ended
December 31, 2004 as compared to the prior year primarily
due to improved efficiencies in our manufacturing and
distribution operations as well as managing material receipts
more effectively.
Our gross product bookings increased 5.2% to $382,000 for the
three months ended December 31, 2004 from $363,000 for the
three months ended September 30, 2004.
The ratio of our product bookings to product revenue was 1.02
for the quarter ended December 31, 2004. Our product
backlog, which is another measure we monitor, continued to grow
in the quarter, ending December 31, 2004 at $342,000, which
included $9,000 of additional backlog from Matrics. Essentially
all of the reported backlog is expected to be shipped to the
customer within six months. Product backlog as of
December 31, 2003 was $293,800.
Our percent of product revenue that was shipped through our
indirect channel in the year ended December 31, 2004 was
74%. This is up 23 percentage points from 2002, when we
began our migration to a channel-centric business model.
Current results of customer satisfaction surveys from our
services business have demonstrated improvement towards our goal
of a consistent rating greater than 4.0 out of a possible rating
of 5.0. Our most current results were a score of 4.01 and 3.59,
relating to satisfaction with our technical assistance and depot
service delivery, respectively.
While our attach rates have been improving in our sales in the
Americas, overall we believe we can achieve better attach rates
and are making changes in our business process and restructuring
certain aspects of our service activities to help improve these
attach rates in the future.
Because a large concentration of our customers are in the retail
sector, the health of the economy, consumer spending and the
financial health of our retail customers and their capital
expenditures related to their informational technology spending
are important factors we consider when making our short-and
long-term strategic decisions. We remain cautiously optimistic
about the economic recovery for information technology products
in this sector of our business.
We are focused on increasing profitable sales and growing market
share, specifically through our channel-centric business model
and our
PartnerSelecttm
program. Our products face pricing pressure typical of a
technology company. Once a product is introduced in the
marketplace, its selling price usually decreases over the life
of the product. To lessen the effect of price decreases, we
often develop enhancements to our existing products as well as
attempt to reduce manufacturing costs in order to maintain our
profit margin on such products and our overall product
portfolio. Demand for many of our products and services remained
strong throughout 2004 and as a result we do not anticipate a
significant decline in our pricing structure during 2005. We
continue to focus on programs that will enhance our operational
efficiencies and reduce our cost structure, including
consolidating general and administrative activities,
consolidating service repair centers, improving our distribution
channels and our engineering activities.
In 2004 we made a strategic acquisition, acquiring Matrics, a
leader in developing Electronic Product code RFID systems. The
RFID market is at the early stages of development. However we
currently believe that the costs we will incur during the
product life cycle for both existing technology and future,
replacement RFID technology will be consistent with the
expenditures we have incurred in developing and maintaining our
existing enterprise mobility solutions.
52
Results of operations
The following table sets forth for the years ended
December 31, 2002, 2003 and 2004 certain revenue and
expense items expressed as a percentage of total revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product revenue
|
|
|
78.7 |
% |
|
|
80.0 |
% |
|
|
82.8 |
% |
Services revenue
|
|
|
21.3 |
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
|
17.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product cost of revenue
|
|
|
49.5 |
|
|
|
41.5 |
|
|
|
41.0 |
|
Services cost of revenue
|
|
|
15.7 |
|
|
|
14.4 |
|
|
|
12.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65.2 |
% |
|
|
55.9 |
% |
|
|
53.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
34.8 |
|
|
|
44.1 |
|
|
|
46.7 |
|
Operating Expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Write-off of acquired in-process research & development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
Engineering
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
|
10.2 |
|
|
|
9.7 |
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
24.5 |
|
|
|
27.5 |
|
|
|
29.0 |
|
Stock based compensation expenses/(recovery)
|
|
|
(4.9 |
) |
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
(Recovery)/provision for legal settlements
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
Restructuring and impairment charges
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
37.0 |
% |
|
|
43.6 |
% |
|
|
38.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings/(loss) from operations
|
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
8.1 |
|
Other expense, net
|
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings/(loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
(4.4 |
) |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
Provisions for/(benefit from) income taxes
|
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings/(loss)
|
|
|
(3.2 |
)% |
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
4.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53
Year ended December 31, 2004 compared to year ended
December 31, 2003
The following table summarizes our revenue by reportable
business segments and geographic regions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Variance in | |
|
Variance in | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
Dollars | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Total Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas
|
|
$ |
979,099 |
|
|
$ |
1,116,229 |
|
|
$ |
137,130 |
|
|
|
14.0 |
% |
|
EMEA
|
|
|
438,615 |
|
|
|
487,221 |
|
|
|
48,606 |
|
|
|
11.1 |
% |
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
112,564 |
|
|
|
128,673 |
|
|
|
16,109 |
|
|
|
14.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenue
|
|
|
1,530,278 |
|
|
|
1,732,123 |
|
|
|
201,845 |
|
|
|
13.2 |
% |
Product Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas
|
|
|
777,105 |
|
|
$ |
921,975 |
|
|
$ |
144,870 |
|
|
|
18.6 |
% |
|
EMEA
|
|
|
345,983 |
|
|
|
394,747 |
|
|
|
48,764 |
|
|
|
14.1 |
% |
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
100,765 |
|
|
|
116,949 |
|
|
|
16,184 |
|
|
|
16.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Product Revenue
|
|
|
1,223,853 |
|
|
|
1,433,671 |
|
|
|
209,818 |
|
|
|
17.1 |
% |
Services Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas
|
|
$ |
201,994 |
|
|
$ |
194,254 |
|
|
$ |
(7,740 |
) |
|
|
(3.8 |
)% |
|
EMEA
|
|
|
92,632 |
|
|
|
92,474 |
|
|
|
(158 |
) |
|
|
(0.2 |
)% |
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
11,799 |
|
|
|
11,724 |
|
|
|
(75 |
) |
|
|
(0.6 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Services Revenue
|
|
$ |
306,425 |
|
|
$ |
298,452 |
|
|
$ |
(7,973 |
) |
|
|
(2.6 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes our product revenue by product
division:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Variance in | |
|
Variance in | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
Dollars | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Product Division:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile Computing
|
|
$ |
755,559 |
|
|
$ |
885,469 |
|
|
$ |
129,910 |
|
|
|
17.2 |
% |
Advanced Data Capture
|
|
|
352,410 |
|
|
|
407,697 |
|
|
|
55,287 |
|
|
|
15.7 |
% |
Wireless Infrastructure
|
|
|
128,357 |
|
|
|
150,663 |
|
|
|
22,306 |
|
|
|
17.4 |
% |
RFID
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,610 |
|
|
|
5,610 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Other, net
|
|
|
(12,473 |
) |
|
|
(15,768 |
) |
|
|
(3,295 |
) |
|
|
26.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,223,853 |
|
|
$ |
1,433,671 |
|
|
$ |
209,818 |
|
|
|
17.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net represents royalty revenues and rebates which we do
not assign to a product division.
Product revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004 was
$1,433,671, an increase of $209,818 or 17.1% from the prior
year. This increase included $5,610 of revenue related to
Matrics from September 9, 2004, the date we acquired
Matrics. The increase was primarily due to continued growth in
sales volume of our mobile computing product offerings, our
largest product line, which experienced growth of $129,910, an
increase of 17.2% from the prior year. Contributing to this
increase is the growth in sales volume of both our next
generation mobile gun and rugged handheld mobile computing
devices. Also contributing to the product revenue increase was
growth in sales volume of our advanced data capture product line
of $55,287, an increase of 15.7% from the prior year, which was
primarily driven by continued growth in next generation
scanners, which included a large rollout of wireless
point-of-sale scanners to a nationwide U.S. retailer. In
addition, there was a significant purchase of point of sale
terminals by a nationwide U.S. retailer during the year
ended December 31, 2004. Wireless product revenue increased
by $22,306, an increase of 17.4% for the year ended
December 31, 2004, respectively, from the prior year
primarily due to the introduction of a new wireless
54
switch. The increase in revenue within the mobile computing,
advanced data capture and wireless infrastructure product
divisions for the year ended December 31, 2004 was
primarily driven by increased sales volume as the pricing
structure remained relatively consistent as compared to the
prior year. The decrease in other, net for the year ended
December 31, 2004 was primarily due to increased rebates to
our distribution partners due to changes to the
PartnerSelecttm
model combined with their increased sales volume. This was
partially offset by an increase in royalty revenue.
Services revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004 was
$298,452, a decrease of 2.6% from the prior year. The decrease
for the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared to the
prior year was due to our continued drive to utilize third party
service providers for lower margin professional service
activities and a lower level of cash collections compared to the
prior year as a portion of our U.S. service revenue is
recognized on a billed and collected basis. This was partially
offset by a positive impact of $5,823 which was the result of
recording a majority of new contracts on an accrual basis from a
billed and collected basis effective July 1, 2004.
Geographically, the Americas revenue increased 14.0% for the
year ended December 31, 2004, from the prior year. Europe,
Middle East and Africa (EMEA) revenue increased
11.1%, for the year ended December 31, 2004, from 2003. The
increases in the Americas and EMEA revenues are mainly
attributable to strong growth in all of our product offerings.
Asia Pacific revenue increased 14.3% for the year ended
December 31 2004, compared to the prior year primarily as a
result of continued penetration of all of our product offerings
into this marketplace. The Americas, EMEA and Asia Pacific
represented 64.5%, 28.1% and 7.4% of revenue, respectively, for
the year ended December 31, 2004.
Product gross profit for the year ended December 31, 2004
was $723,704 an increase of $134,954 or 22.9% from the prior
year. The increase in product gross profit was mainly due to an
increase in revenue which accounted for $100,936 of the
increase. The remaining increase to product gross profit of
approximately $34,018 was due to an increase in gross profit
percentage of 2.4%, for the year ended December 31, 2004.
The increase in our gross profit percentage was primarily due to
a change in our product mix and increased efficiencies gained in
our manufacturing operations.
Service gross profit for the year ended December 31, 2004
was $85,334, a decrease of $1,165 from the prior year. The
decrease in service gross profit for the year ended
December 31, 2004 was primarily due to restructuring
charges relating to lease obligation costs and further workforce
reductions, coupled with the decline in revenues partially
offset by a change in mix from low margin professional services
to higher margin maintenance and support services.
Operating expenses
Total operating expenses of $668,678 increased 0.1% for the year
ended December 31, 2004 from $667,728 for the prior year.
Operating expenses consisted of the following for the years
ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Variance in | |
|
Variance in | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
Dollars | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Write-off of acquired in-process research and development
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
12,800 |
|
|
$ |
12,800 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Engineering
|
|
|
156,328 |
|
|
|
167,543 |
|
|
|
11,215 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
421,132 |
|
|
|
502,331 |
|
|
|
81,199 |
|
|
|
19.3 |
|
(Recovery)/provision for legal settlements
|
|
|
72,000 |
|
|
|
(21,400 |
) |
|
|
(93,400 |
) |
|
|
(129.7 |
) |
Stock based compensation expense
|
|
|
17,087 |
|
|
|
2,234 |
|
|
|
(14,853 |
) |
|
|
(86.9 |
) |
Restructuring and impairment charges
|
|
|
1,181 |
|
|
|
5,170 |
|
|
|
3,989 |
|
|
|
337.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
667,728 |
|
|
$ |
668,678 |
|
|
$ |
950 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55
The write-off of acquired in-process research and development
costs (IPR&D) of $12,800 for the year ended
December 31, 2004 is in connection with our acquisition of
Matrics. Such amount allocated to IPR&D represented a
portion of the total value of the acquired assets. We believe
the Matrics acquisition is an important step in executing our
plan to be a leader in RFID and will expand our offerings in the
advanced data capture industry.
Our assumptions for IPR&D were based on our estimate of the
present value of the cash flows arising from each of the
material research and development projects in which Matrics was
investing at the time of closing. Each project was evaluated
based on the income approach. With the exception of the
proprietary manufacturing process, this was achieved by
discounting cash flows to be derived from the sales of the
products to their present value. For the proprietary
manufacturing process, the income approach was used by
estimating the gross margin benefit from the technology and
discounting the cash flows from that gross margin benefit. The
values prescribed to the IPR&D and the technology assets
acquired were based upon several factors including the
generation of the technology acquired, the estimated lives and
future revenue and costs associated with the technology.
The products included in IPR&D ranged from the early stages
of development to the latter stages of development at the time
of acquisition. A discount rate ranging from 23% to 30% was used
for the projects to account for various risks, including the
technical risk, the risk that customers will not desire to
purchase the product, the risk around significant price erosion,
the risk of commercializing the technology, the risk that even
once successfully commercialized the technology may not yield
the gross margin benefit and for the broader market risk
associated with the adoption of RFID.
Engineering expenses increased $11,215 or 7.2% for the year
ended December 31, 2004 as compared to the prior year,
mainly due to our increased investment in our research and
development.
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased $81,199
or 19.3% for the year ended December 31, 2004 as compared
to the prior year, mainly due to higher compensation costs and
related benefits (particularly in our sales force), investment
in technology, infrastructure and financial systems, external
consulting costs associated with our compliance efforts under
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, partially offset by a decrease
in expenses associated with our restatement activities and legal
fees associated with litigation activities.
Legal settlements for the year ended December 31, 2004
decreased $93,400. This decrease is driven by the fact that the
year ended December 31, 2004 included recoveries of $21,400
related to our various legal matters, while the prior year ended
December 31, 2003 included a provision related to certain
legal settlements of $72,000.
Also included in total operating expenses is stock based
compensation associated with certain portions of our stock
option plans. As of March 31, 2003, due to our inability to
make timely filings with the SEC, our stock option plans were
held in abeyance, meaning that our employees could not exercise
their options until we became current with our filings. As an
accommodation to both current and former Symbol associates whose
options were impacted by this suspension, the Compensation
Committee of the Board approved an abeyance program that allowed
associates whose options were affected during the suspension
period the right to exercise such options up to 90 days
after the end of the suspension period. This resulted in a new
measurement date for those options, which led to a non-cash
accounting compensation charge for the intrinsic value of those
vested options when the employee either terminated employment
during the suspension period or within the 90 day period
after the end of the suspension period. Stock based compensation
related to the abeyance program was $2,234 during the year ended
December 31 2004. On February 25, 2004, the date on
which we became current with our regulatory filings with the
SEC, this suspension period ended.
The stock based compensation expense during 2003 are amounts
associated with the variable portion of our stock option plans.
56
In the second quarter of 2004, we announced a restructuring of
certain of our EMEA general and administrative functions,
whereby we are consolidating certain functions centrally in
Brno, Czech Republic. For the year ended December 31, 2004
we charged $5,025, the majority of such costs were related to
severance costs.
Other (expense)/income
Other (expense)/income, net consists of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
Variance | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
SAILS(a)
|
|
$ |
2,817 |
|
|
$ |
(5,559 |
) |
|
$ |
(8,376 |
) |
Interest Expense(b)
|
|
|
(10,590 |
) |
|
|
(20,032 |
) |
|
|
(9,442 |
) |
Interest Income
|
|
|
2,969 |
|
|
|
3,507 |
|
|
|
538 |
|
Impairment of Investments
|
|
|
(3,550 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,550 |
|
Other
|
|
|
4,734 |
|
|
|
5,493 |
|
|
|
759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(3,620 |
) |
|
$ |
(16,591 |
) |
|
$ |
(12,971 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
In accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities the gain or loss on the change in fair value of
the portion of our investment in Cisco Systems, Inc.
(Cisco) common stock, coupled with the gain or loss
on the change in fair value of the embedded derivative has been
recorded as a component of other income or loss in each
reporting period. |
|
|
|
(b) |
|
Included in 2004s interest expense are $6,675 of financing
costs associated with a $250 million short-term facility
entered into in September 2004 which was refinanced in December
2004. |
Provision for income taxes
Our effective income tax rate for the year ended
December 31, 2004 was 33.9%. This differs from the
statutory rate of 35.0% for several reasons. The rate is
increased by the non-deductible portion of the class action
settlement reached in 2004 and write-off of IPR&D associated
with the acquisition of Matrics. The rate is reduced by the tax
benefits of research credits, the reduction of valuation
allowances primarily associated with the Companys foreign
tax credit carryforwards and export sales benefits. Without the
Matrics acquisition, the tax rate for the year ended
December 31, 2004 would have been 31.2%.
As part of determining the Companys annual income tax
provision, we evaluated the need for valuation allowances
against our deferred tax assets. A valuation allowance is
recorded when it is more likely than not that all, or a portion
of, a deferred tax asset will not be realized. In assessing the
likelihood of realization, management considers estimates of
future taxable income, the character of income and other
available evidence.
Three forecasts of future sources of taxable income were
prepared based on various assumptions concerning the growth of
the Companys business operations that are subject to
income tax in the United States. The reversal of all significant
timing differences was considered in calculating the forecasted
taxable income under each scenario. The estimated income tax
payable was then calculated based on the tax rates in effect as
of December 31, 2004. Tax credits (including a forecast of
expected tax credits that will arise in each year of the
forecast) were then applied to reduce the tax, subject to
existing limitations under the applicable tax laws. Based on
these forecasts, substantially all of the deferred tax assets
would be utilized well before the underlying tax
attributes expiration periods.
In addition, the Company prepared an historical analysis of its
taxable income and cash tax liability position for the years
1994 through 2003. During this time period, the Company
generated net taxable income of $266,000, which resulted in over
$93,000 of tax before credits.
57
Based on the strength of the evidence, the Company has concluded
that no valuation allowance is required with respect to the
deferred tax assets that were included in the analyses. However,
a valuation allowance has been recorded for the potential future
income tax attributes associated with certain state and local
income tax net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards at
December 31, 2004. These carryforwards relate to legal
entities required to file separate company state and local
income tax returns and thus such entities cannot rely on the
above consolidated forecasts.
The Company expects to settle all or a substantial part of its
income tax audit with the Internal Revenue Service for tax years
1999 2001 during 2005.
On October 22, 2004 the President signed the American Jobs
Creation Act of 2004 (AJCA). The AJCA creates a
temporary incentive for U.S. corporations to repatriate
accumulated income earned abroad by providing an 85 percent
dividends received deduction for certain dividends from
controlled foreign corporations. The deduction is subject to a
number of limitations and, as of today, uncertainty remains as
to how to interpret numerous provisions of the Act. As such, we
are not yet in a position to decide on whether, and to what
extent, we might repatriate foreign earnings that have not yet
been remitted to the U.S. Based on analysis to date, we
expect to repatriate up to $95,000 in accordance with this
temporary incentive. The resulting tax impact of repatriation
cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. We expect to
finalize our assessment of this new provision by
September 30, 2005.
Year ended December 31, 2003 compared to year ended
December 31, 2002
The following table summarizes our revenue by reportable
business segments and geographic regions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Variance in | |
|
Variance in | |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
Dollars | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Total Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas
|
|
$ |
934,170 |
|
|
$ |
979,099 |
|
|
$ |
44,929 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
% |
|
EMEA
|
|
|
382,846 |
|
|
|
438,615 |
|
|
|
55,769 |
|
|
|
14.6 |
|
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
84,601 |
|
|
|
112,564 |
|
|
|
27,963 |
|
|
|
33.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Revenue
|
|
$ |
1,401,617 |
|
|
$ |
1,530,278 |
|
|
$ |
128,661 |
|
|
|
9.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas
|
|
$ |
728,294 |
|
|
$ |
777,105 |
|
|
$ |
48,811 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
% |
|
EMEA
|
|
|
300,130 |
|
|
|
345,983 |
|
|
|
45,853 |
|
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
74,646 |
|
|
|
100,765 |
|
|
|
26,119 |
|
|
|
35.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Product Revenue
|
|
$ |
1,103,070 |
|
|
$ |
1,223,853 |
|
|
$ |
120,783 |
|
|
|
10.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services Revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas
|
|
$ |
205,876 |
|
|
$ |
201,994 |
|
|
$ |
(3,882 |
) |
|
|
(1.9 |
)% |
|
EMEA
|
|
|
82,716 |
|
|
|
92,632 |
|
|
|
9,916 |
|
|
|
12.0 |
|
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
9,955 |
|
|
|
11,799 |
|
|
|
1,844 |
|
|
|
18.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Services Revenue
|
|
$ |
298,547 |
|
|
$ |
306,425 |
|
|
$ |
7,878 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58
The following table summarizes our product revenue by product
division:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Variance in | |
|
Variance in | |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
Dollars | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Product Division:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile Computing
|
|
$ |
695,353 |
|
|
$ |
755,559 |
|
|
$ |
60,206 |
|
|
|
8.7 |
% |
Advanced Data Capture
|
|
|
317,091 |
|
|
|
352,410 |
|
|
|
35,319 |
|
|
|
11.1 |
|
Wireless Infrastructure
|
|
|
103,285 |
|
|
|
128,357 |
|
|
|
25,072 |
|
|
|
24.3 |
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(12,659 |
) |
|
|
(12,473 |
) |
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
(1.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,103,070 |
|
|
$ |
1,223,853 |
|
|
$ |
120,783 |
|
|
|
10.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net represents royalty revenues and rebates which we do
not assign to a product division.
Product revenue for the year ended December 31, 2003 was
$1,223,853, an increase of 10.9% from $1,103,070 in 2002. The
increase in product revenue of $120,783 was primarily due to
continued growth in our mobile computing product offerings, our
largest product line, representing $60,206 or 49.8% of the total
product revenue growth. Also contributing to the product revenue
growth was growth in our advanced data capture and wireless
network systems product line.
Services revenue of $306,425 for the year ended
December 31, 2003 increased 2.6% from $298,547 in 2002, due
to increased services revenue related to our overall product
growth, particularly in our EMEA and Asia Pacific regions.
Geographically, the Americas revenue for the year ended
December 31, 2003 was $979,099, an increase of 4.8% from
the $934,170 in 2002. EMEA revenue of $438,615 increased 14.6%
for the year ended December 31, 2003 from $382,846 in 2002.
Asia Pacific revenue of $112,564 increased 33.1% for the year
ended December 31, 2003 from $84,601 in 2002. The Americas,
EMEA and Asia Pacific represented 64.0%, 28.6% and 7.4% of total
revenue, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2003.
The table below summarizes cost of revenue and gross profit by
business segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Variance in | |
|
Variance in | |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
Dollars | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Product Revenue
|
|
$ |
1,103,070 |
|
|
$ |
1,223,853 |
|
|
$ |
120,783 |
|
|
|
10.9 |
% |
Product Cost of Revenue
|
|
|
693,980 |
|
|
|
635,103 |
|
|
|
(58,877 |
) |
|
|
(8.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Gross Profit
|
|
$ |
409,090 |
|
|
$ |
588,750 |
|
|
$ |
179,660 |
|
|
|
43.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Cost of Revenue as a Percentage of Product Revenue
|
|
|
62.9 |
% |
|
|
51.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Gross Profit Percentage
|
|
|
37.1 |
% |
|
|
48.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services Revenue
|
|
$ |
298,547 |
|
|
$ |
306,425 |
|
|
$ |
7,878 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
% |
Services Cost of Revenue
|
|
|
219,985 |
|
|
|
219,926 |
|
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services Gross Profit
|
|
$ |
78,562 |
|
|
$ |
86,499 |
|
|
$ |
7,937 |
|
|
|
10.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services Cost of Revenue as a Percentage of Services Revenue
|
|
|
73.7 |
% |
|
|
71.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Services Gross Profit Percentage
|
|
|
26.3 |
% |
|
|
28.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product cost of revenue as a percentage of product revenue was
51.9% for the year ended December 31, 2003, as compared to
62.9% in 2002. This decrease was due to an overall shift in
product mix to higher margin products, increased manufacturing
absorption due to higher sales volumes and increased
efficiencies gained in our manufacturing operations.
Contributing to the improved gross profit was the absence of the
following 2002 charges: an $11,800 impairment charge related to
manufacturing equipment software, a $4,900 provision for a
59
loss contract, severance charges of $4,500, additional warranty
costs of $1,900 and other restructuring-related costs of $2,300.
Also contributing to the lower costs as a percentage of product
revenue was the sale in the fourth quarter of 2003 of
approximately $10,000 of inventory that had previously been
reserved for.
Services cost of revenue as a percentage of services revenue was
71.8% for the year ended December 31, 2003, as compared to
73.7% in 2002. The majority of the decrease was due to the
efficiencies gained from the consolidation and elimination of
repair centers as well as increased revenue, particularly in the
EMEA and Asia Pacific regions.
Operating expenses of $667,728 increased 28.6% for the year
ended December 31, 2003 from $519,379 in 2002. These
increases were largely driven by the accounting treatment
related to our stock-based compensation plans which resulted in
additional costs of $17,087 for the year ended December 31,
2003, as compared to a recovery of $68,084 in 2002. Also
contributing to the increased operating expenses were costs
associated with our restatement and the government investigation
as further described below.
In connection with the exercise of stock options, an informal
practice began in or around the early 1990s, whereby certain
stock option plan participants (including certain officers and
directors) were afforded a look-back period (no more than
30 days) for purposes of determining the market price to be
used in connection with the specific exercise. In addition,
these individuals were given an extended period of time in which
to pay for their option exercises. These practices were contrary
to the terms of the relevant option plans. As this practice
allowed certain participants to choose exercise dates outside of
the approved plan terms and also allowed these participants to
extend the period of time in which to pay for their option
exercise, the price of the option at grant date was not fixed
and determinable. Accordingly, in accordance with Accounting
Principles Board Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock
Issued to Employees, our financial statements reflect as
compensation expense the change in market price of the common
stock underlying these options granted to plan participants that
could have participated in this practice from the date of grant
until the options either expired or were exercised. Effective
July 30, 2002, this practice of options exercise ended
resulting in ceasing the accounting for such options under
variable plan accounting. The $68,084 represents the change in
market price of common stock underlying these options granted
through the seven-month period ended July 30, 2002.
As of March 31, 2003, due to the inability of Symbol to
make timely filings with the SEC, our stock option plans were
held in abeyance, meaning that our employees could not exercise
their options until we became current with our filings. As an
accommodation to both current and former Symbol employees whose
options were impacted by this suspension, the compensation
committee of the board of directors approved an abeyance program
that allowed employees whose options were affected during the
suspension period the right to exercise such options up to
90 days after the end of the suspension period. This
resulted in a new measurement date for those options, which led
to a non-cash accounting compensation charge for the intrinsic
value of those vested options when the employee either
terminated employment during the suspension period or within the
90 day period after the end of the suspension period. On
February 25, 2004, the date on which we became current with
our regulatory filings with the SEC, this suspension period
ended. In addition, due to our delinquent filings with the SEC,
we incurred non-cash compensation expenses associated with our
Employee Stock Purchase Plan (ESPP) as the ESPP lost
its exempt tax status.
Engineering and selling, general and administrative expenses are
summarized in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Variance in | |
|
Variance in | |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
Dollars | |
|
Percentage | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Engineering
|
|
$ |
142,602 |
|
|
$ |
156,328 |
|
|
$ |
13,726 |
|
|
|
9.6 |
% |
|
Percentage of total revenue
|
|
|
10.2 |
% |
|
|
10.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
$ |
343,971 |
|
|
$ |
421,132 |
|
|
$ |
77,161 |
|
|
|
22.4 |
% |
|
Percentage of total revenue
|
|
|
24.5 |
% |
|
|
27.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
Engineering costs for the year ended December 31, 2003
increased 9.6% to $156,328 from $142,602 for 2002. The increase
was due to the acquisition of Covigo to expand our software
solutions offerings, and continued investment in our product
offerings. The increase was consistent with projected and actual
revenue growth as engineering spending as a percentage of
revenue remained relatively constant in the 10% range. The
increased spending was spread across all product lines.
Selling, general and administrative expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2003 increased 22.4% to $421,132 from $343,971
for 2002. The increase was attributable to additional
professional fees associated with our internal investigation as
well as higher variable costs due to a 9.2% increase in revenue,
partially offset by the absence of a $8,597 pre-tax severance
charge recorded in 2002 for Tomo Razmilovic, one of our former
Presidents and Chief Executive Officers. In early 2002 we
initiated a series of investigations into the accounting
misconduct of our former management with the assistance of an
independent counsel and an outside accounting firm. As a result
of this internal investigation, the SEC and Eastern District
investigations and the related class action lawsuits against us,
we incurred additional professional fees of $35,900 in 2003 as
compared with $9,200 incurred in 2002. The increase was also
attributable to severance costs incurred during 2003 aggregating
$13,208 primarily for the reorganization and releveling of the
international sales organization.
Reflected in our operating expenses for the year ended
December 31, 2003 was a $72,000 loss provision for legal
settlements related to the then-ongoing SEC and Eastern District
investigations and the then-outstanding class action lawsuits
against us. This compared to charges totaling $98,300 recorded
in 2002, of which $70,000 related to the then-ongoing SEC and
Eastern District investigations and the then-outstanding class
action lawsuits against us and $28,300 related to a securities
fraud class action litigation related to Telxon, one of our
wholly-owned subsidiaries.
Interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2003
decreased to $10,590 or 37.0% from $16,801 in 2002 primarily due
to reduced debt levels as a result of the repurchase in 2002 of
Telxons remaining convertible debt, net repayments under
our revolving credit facility and annual mandatory repayments of
other indebtedness, without incurring any new borrowings in 2002
or 2003.
Interest income for the year ended December 31, 2003
increased 27.9% to $2,969 from $2,322 for 2002, primarily due to
the investments of additional cash from operations into
overnight deposits with local banks, primarily in our
non-U.S. locations.
We periodically evaluate the carrying value of our investments
for impairment. As part of this evaluation, we reviewed our
investment in AirClic, Inc. (AirClic). In
consideration of the then-current financial outlook of
AirClics business, the general decline in the economy and
the decline in information technology spending, it was
determined that the decline in the value of our investment in
AirClic was other than temporary during the quarter ended
June 30, 2002. We recorded a pre-tax impairment charge of
$32,200, which was included in the impairment of investments as
a component of other (expense)/income in the consolidated
statements of operations at December 31, 2002 and wrote
down the carrying amount of the investment to its estimated fair
value of $2,800. During 2003, we invested another $750 in
AirClic, bringing our investment to $3,550. We determined in
2003 that this investment would not be recoverable and wrote off
this investment in its entirety in 2003.
In accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities, the gain or loss on the change in fair value
of the portion of our investment in Cisco common stock
classified as trading securities, coupled with the gain or loss
of the change in fair value of the embedded derivative, was
recorded as a component of other (expense)/income in each
reporting period. The net impact of these fair value adjustments
resulted in other (expense)/income of $(1,140) for 2003 and
$16,275 for 2002. On April 1, 2003 we designated a portion
of the embedded equity collar as a fair value hedge of our Cisco
shares classified as available for sale securities. Since the
collar was effective, the change in the fair value of Cisco
shares classified as available for sale of $8,379 was recorded
as other income.
61
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes |
Our effective income tax rate was 15.5% for 2003. The effective
tax rate each year was largely impacted by the ratio of items
receiving different treatment for tax and accounting purposes to
profit/(loss) before taxes. In 2003, the effective rate was
reduced by the impact of research and experimentation credits
and export sales benefits partially offset by valuation
allowances and non-deductible items. Our effective income tax
rate was (27.2)% for 2002 as the favorable impact of tax credits
was more than offset by additional valuation allowances and the
unfavorable impact of non-deductible compensation expenses.
Liquidity and capital resources
Currently, our primary sources of liquidity are cash flow from
operations and our new credit facility. See
Existing indebtedness. Our primary
liquidity requirements continue to be for working capital,
engineering costs, and financing and investing activities. Based
on our current level of operations, cash flow from operations
has been sufficient to meet our liquidity needs to fund
operations as well as our liquidity needs created by changes in
working capital. We believe our cash and cash equivalents and
cash flow from operations will be sufficient for at least the
next 12 months. In addition, we will, from time to time,
consider cash outlays for acquisitions of or investments in
complementary businesses that might affect liquidity
requirements and cause us to pursue additional financing.
The following table summarizes Symbols cash and cash
equivalent balances as of December 31, 2003 and
December 31, 2004 and the results of our statements of cash
flows for the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of | |
|
As of | |
|
Variance | |
|
|
December 31, 2003 | |
|
December 31, 2004 | |
|
in Dollars | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
150,017 |
|
|
$ |
217,641 |
(1) |
|
$ |
67,624 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year | |
|
For the Year | |
|
|
|
|
Ended | |
|
Ended | |
|
Variance | |
|
|
December 30, 2003 | |
|
December 30, 2004 | |
|
in Dollars | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net cash provided by/(used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$ |
233,765 |
|
|
$ |
224,519 |
|
|
$ |
(9,246 |
) |
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(79,268 |
) |
|
|
(381,844 |
) |
|
|
(302,576 |
) |
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(92,338 |
) |
|
|
215,670 |
|
|
|
308,008 |
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
11,737 |
|
|
|
9,279 |
|
|
|
(2,458 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
73,896 |
|
|
$ |
67,624 |
|
|
$ |
(6,272 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
Does not include restricted cash of $51,370, as of
December 31, 2004 which is comprised of two deposits. One
amount of $50,358 at December 31, 2004 is an
interest-bearing court escrow account as security for a trial
court judgment on appeal. The second amount of $1,012 at
December 31, 2004 is an interest-bearing letter of credit
pledged as a supplier bond. |
Net cash provided by operating activities during the year ended
December 31, 2004 was $224,519 as compared to $233,765 for
the prior year. Net cash provided by operating activities
decreased $9,246 during the year ended December 31, 2004 as
compared to the comparable prior year period primarily due to
our use of cash to reduce and pay down our outstanding accounts
payable and accrued expenses partially offset by increased net
earnings. Included in the use of cash was the $40,000 payment as
required by the Eastern District and the SEC to resolve the
government investigations and the $25,000 settlement related to
the Telxon class action lawsuit that was paid in February 2004
partially offset by cash recoveries related to these legal
settlements of $21,400.
62
Net cash provided by operating activities for the year ended
December 31, 2003 increased to $233,765, a 31.7%
improvement from the $177,470 reported in 2002. The improvement
was primarily attributable to improved gross profit margins as
well as better management of managing receivables and inventory.
During 2003, we generated net cash provided by operating
activities of $233,765 and experienced an overall increase in
cash of $73,896. The positive cash flow provided by operating
activities as well as the proceeds from the exercise of stock
options, warrants and the employee stock purchase plan were used
to repay long-term debt, purchase property, plant and equipment,
invest in new companies and other assets, repurchase our common
stock, and pay dividends.
Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended
December 31, 2004 was $381,844 as compared to $79,268 for
the prior year. Net cash used in investing activities
principally consisted of net investments in other companies and
capital expenditures for property, plant and equipment. The
increase of cash used of $302,576 during the year ended
December 31, 2004, when compared to the prior year, was
primarily due to approximately $235,000 used in connection with
the Matrics acquisition, approximately $31,000 in additional
capital expenditures, primarily related to our investment in
technology, infrastructure and financial systems and the $50,000
bond Symbol and Telxon posted as security for a trial court
judgment on appeal.
Net cash used in investing activities for the year ended
December 31, 2003 was $79,268, an 81.7% increase from
$43,632 reported in 2002, primarily resulting from increased
purchases of property, plant and equipment due to investments
made in administrative software and systems to enhance our back
office capabilities and improve customer service.
Net cash provided by financing activities during the year ended
December 31, 2004 was $215,670, compared to net cash used
in financing activities of $92,338 during the prior year. Net
cash provided by financing activities during the year ended
December 31, 2004 consisted of net proceeds from short-term
financing and long-term debt of approximately $200,000 and stock
option exercises and employee stock purchases of approximately
$47,000 partially offset by purchases of treasury stock of
approximately $27,000 compared to cash used in financing
activities for repayments on long-term debt of $86,782 in the
prior year.
Net cash used in financing activities for the year ended
December 31, 2003 was $92,338, a 31.4% decrease from
$134,565 reported in 2002 as a result of lower debt repayments
in 2003. During 2002, Symbol paid off in full its remaining
obligation under its convertible notes and debentures. In 2003,
Symbol paid off in full its remaining obligations under our
prior revolving credit facility.
The following table presents selected key performance
measurements we use to monitor our business for the years ended
December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Days sales outstanding (DSO)
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Inventory turnover product only
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
Our DSO and inventory turnover numbers are useful in
understanding the management of our balance sheet. However, the
DSO numbers shown above may not be directly comparable to those
of other companies because our DSO numbers are improved by the
timing of our revenue recognized for our distributors, cash
received in advance of revenue recognition, part of our service
revenue in the Americas and our value-added resellers that lack
economic substance, which we recognize on a billed and collected
basis.
We continue to effectively manage our net accounts receivables,
ending December 31, 2004 with receivables of $113,658, a
decrease of $38,719 from $152,377 at December 31, 2003.
Through aggressive collection strategies we have been able to
reduce days sales outstanding to 23 days during the year
ended December 31, 2004 from 35 days in the year ended
December 31, 2003.
Our inventory turns increased to 4.5 from 3.9 for the year ended
December 31, 2004 compared to the year ended 2003 primarily
due to improved efficiencies in our manufacturing and
distribution operations as well as more effectively managing
materials receipts.
63
Other liquidity measures
Other measures of our liquidity include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2002 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Working capital (current assets minus current liabilities)
|
|
$ |
216,316 |
|
|
$ |
197,808 |
|
|
$ |
135,985 |
|
Current ratio (current assets to current liabilities)
|
|
|
1.5:1 |
|
|
|
1.4:1 |
|
|
|
1.2:1 |
|
Long-term debt to capital (long-term debt as a percentage of
long-term debt plus equity)
|
|
|
13.3 |
% |
|
|
9.7 |
% |
|
|
14.1 |
% |
Current assets as of December 31, 2004 increased by $8,736
from December 31, 2003, primarily due to an increase in
cash partially offset by a reduction in receivables. Accounts
receivable decreased due to improved cash collections, however a
portion of the cash generated was used to pay down and reduce
our outstanding accounts payable and accrued expenses. Current
liabilities as of December 31, 2004 increased $70,559 from
December 31, 2003 primarily due to our credit facility
entered into to finance our acquisition of Matrics, partially
offset by a decrease in accounts payable and accrued expenses.
As a result, working capital decreased $61,823 between
December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003. Included in
our current liabilities at December 31, 2004 is $86,625
related to an amount due to our settlement of certain
litigation. Our current ratio was 1.2:1 at December 31,
2004 and 1.4:1 at December 31, 2003.
Current assets as of December 31, 2003 increased by $43,615
from December 31, 2002, principally due to an increase in
cash due to improved cash flows from operations partially offset
by a decrease in inventories due to improved inventory
management. Current liabilities as of December 31, 2003
increased $62,123 from December 31, 2002 primarily due to
an increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses of which
$72,000 was an additional liability established in 2003 for
settlements of the SEC and Eastern District investigations and
related securities fraud class action lawsuits. As a result,
working capital decreased $18,508 between December 31, 2002
and December 31, 2003. Our current ratio of 1.4:1 at
December 31, 2003 decreased from 1.5:1 at December 31,
2002.
Financing activities
As of December 31, 2004 and December 31, 2003, there
were no borrowings outstanding under our Prior Revolving Credit
Facility.
During 2000, we entered into a $50,000 lease receivable
securitization agreement, which matured on December 31,
2003 and was subsequently extended until December 2005. For the
year ended December 31, 2003, we securitized $7,275 of
lease receivables, which resulted in upfront proceeds from new
securitizations of $4,400. As of December 31, 2004, we had
the ability to securitize $43,055 under the lease receivable
securitization agreement. Factors that are reasonably likely to
affect our ability to continue using these financing
arrangements include the ability to generate lease receivables
that qualify for securitization and the ability of the financial
institution to obtain an investment grade rating for such
securitization from either of the two major credit rating
agencies. We do not consider the securitization of lease
receivables to be a significant contributing factor to our
continued liquidity.
64
Existing indebtedness
At December 31, 2003 and December 31, 2004, our
short-term financing and long-term debt outstanding, excluding
current maturities, was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2003 | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Senior Secured Term Loan Facility
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
100,000 |
|
Senior Secured Revolving Credit Facility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
Short-term financing: short-term credit facility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior revolving credit facility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secured installment loan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,369 |
|
SAILS exchangeable debt
|
|
|
98,927 |
|
|
|
83,727 |
|
Other
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
99,246 |
|
|
|
294,159 |
|
Less: current maturities
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
118,072 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
$ |
99,012 |
|
|
$ |
176,087 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On December 29, 2004, we entered into our new credit
facility to be used (i) to repay in full our outstanding
senior indebtedness, comprised of the short-term credit facility
and our prior revolving credit facility; (ii) for working
capital and general corporate purposes; and (iii) to pay
certain fees and expenses incurred in connection with such
transactions. Pursuant to our new credit facility, the lenders
severally agreed to provide us the following: (a) a senior
secured term loan facility in an aggregate principal amount of
$100,000 and (b) a senior secured revolving credit facility
in an aggregate principal amount of up to $150,000 with a
$20,000 sublimit available for letters of credit. Our new credit
facility is secured on a first priority basis by (i) a
pledge of all of the capital stock or other equity interests of
our domestic subsidiaries, (ii) a pledge of 65% of the
capital stock or other equity interests of selected overseas
subsidiaries located in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and
Japan, (iii) 100% of the capital stock of the manufacturing
entity in Reynosa, Mexico and all of its other assets and
(iv) all our other domestic assets (other than real estate)
and the stock of our domestic subsidiaries.
On December 29, 2004, we borrowed $100,000 on the term loan
facility and $100,000 on the revolving credit facility. The term
loan facility is payable at $11,111 per quarter, which
commences on December 15, 2005 through the term loan
maturity date of December 30, 2007. The revolving credit
facility matures on December 30, 2009. The interest rate on
the new credit facility is the greater of (i) the prime
rate and (ii) the federal funds rate plus 0.5%, plus, in
both cases, the applicable margin for U.S.-based loans. For
Eurodollar-based loans, the rate is the adjusted LIBO rate
(defined as the LIBO rate multiplied by the statutory reserve
rate) plus the applicable margin. The applicable margin is based
upon our leverage ratio (defined as the ratio of our total
indebtedness to our consolidated EBITDA for the period of the
most recent four fiscal quarters) plus 0.25% to 1% for
U.S.-based loans and 1.25% to 2% for Eurodollar-based loans. The
interest rate on our new credit facility, which includes our
term loan facility and revolving credit facility, was 6.0% at
December 31, 2004.
Under our new credit facility, there are a number of security
and financial covenant provisions. Our new credit facility
contains customary negative covenants and restrictions on our
ability to engage in specified activities, including, but not
limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
limitations on indebtedness, except, among others, permitted
subordinated debt and unsecured debt not to exceed $30,000 at
any time, indebtedness to finance capital expenditures not to
exceed $20,000 at any time; |
|
|
|
restrictions on liens, mergers and acquisitions, transactions
with affiliates and guarantees; |
65
|
|
|
|
|
limitations on investments, except, among others, permitted
investments, investments by the company and its subsidiaries in
equity interests in their subsidiaries not to exceed $25,000 at
any time, intercompany loans not to exceed $25,000 at any time,
permitted acquisitions not to exceed $50,000 at any time, and
other investments not to exceed $15,000 in the aggregate; |
|
|
|
limitations on sales of assets, among others, to persons other
than affiliates not to exceed $25,000 at any time, and sales or
transfers of lease contracts under the Bank of Tokyo
securitization not to exceed $15,000 in any fiscal year; |
|
|
|
limitations on sale and leaseback transactions not to exceed
$20,000 at any time; and |
|
|
|
restrictions on payments of dividends in an amount not to exceed
$8,000 in any year including limitations on repurchases of
common stock under employee stock purchase plans in an amount
not to exceed $5,000 in any year plus the amount received from
employees during such year in payment of the purchase price of
shares acquired by them under such stock purchase plan. |
Our new credit facility contains customary affirmative covenants
that require us to perform certain activities, including, but
not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
furnish the administrative agent and each lender with certain
periodic financial reports; |
|
|
|
furnish the administrative agent and each lender notice of
certain events, including, but not limited to, the occurrence of
any default or any other occurrence that could reasonably be
expected to result in an material adverse effect; |
|
|
|
furnish the administrative agent with notice regarding any
changes to the collateral; and |
|
|
|
pay taxes and other material obligations, maintain insurance and
keep proper books and records. |
Under provisions of our new credit facility, at our option, we
may seek to obtain investment grade ratings from Moodys
Investors Service, Inc. and Standard & Poors
Ratings Group, Inc. If these ratings are obtained, all
collateral securing the new credit facility will be released.
Our new credit facility contains financial covenants that
(a) restrict our total leverage ratio (debt to adjusted
EBITDA) to a ratio no greater than 2.5 times total debt at any
time, (b) require that we maintain the maximum senior
leverage ratio to 2.0 to 1.0 (after January 1, 2006,
maximum senior leverage is 1.75x at any time total leverage
exceeds 2.0x), (c) require that we maintain minimum fixed
charge coverage ratio of 1.5x and (d) minimum unrestricted
domestic cash requirement of $25,000 at all times prior to
September 30, 2005 and $50,000 at all times thereafter. As
of December 31, 2004, we are in compliance with the
covenants under the new credit facility.
On March 31, 2004, we entered into a purchase money secured
installment loan with a bank for $13,825. The loan is payable in
four semiannual installments of $3,655, including interest,
commencing October 1, 2004. The proceeds received under the
loan were used to finance the purchases of certain software.
In January 2001, we entered into a private Mandatorily
Exchangeable Securities Contract for Shared Appreciation Income
Linked Securities (SAILS) with a highly rated
financial institution. The securities that underlie the SAILS
contract represent our investment in Cisco common stock, which
was acquired in connection with the Telxon acquisition. The
4,160 shares of Cisco common stock had a market value of
$80,288 at December 31, 2004 and $100,797 at
December 31, 2003. Such shares are held as collateral to
secure the debt instrument associated with the SAILS and are
included in Investments in Marketable Securities in the
condensed consolidated balance sheets. This debt has a
seven-year maturity and we pay interest at a cash coupon rate of
3.625%.
In January 2008, the SAILS debt will be exchangeable for shares
of Cisco common stock or, at our option, cash in lieu of shares.
Net proceeds from the issuance of the SAILS and termination of
an existing freestanding collar arrangement were approximately
$262,246, which were used for general corporate purposes,
including the repayment of debt under the then outstanding
revolving credit facility. The SAILS contain an embedded equity
collar, which effectively hedges the exposure to fluctuations in
the fair value of
66
our holdings in Cisco common stock. We account for the embedded
equity collar as a derivative financial instrument in accordance
with the requirements of SFAS No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities. The gain or loss on changes in the fair value
of the derivative is recognized through earnings in the period
of change together with a substantial offsetting gain or loss on
the Cisco shares.
The derivative has been combined with the debt instrument in
long-term debt in the condensed consolidated balance sheets and
presented on a net basis as permitted under
FIN No. 39, Offsetting of Amounts Related to
Certain Contracts, as there exists a legal right of
offset. The SAILS liability, net of the derivative asset,
represents $83,727 at December 31, 2004.
The remaining portion of long-term debt outstanding relates
primarily to capital lease obligations.
Contractual cash obligations
The following is a summary of the contractual commitments
associated with our obligations as of December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
Total | |
|
2005 | |
|
2006 | |
|
2007 | |
|
2008 | |
|
2009 | |
|
Thereafter | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Long-term debt
|
|
$ |
294,111 |
|
|
$ |
118,024 |
|
|
$ |
47,906 |
|
|
$ |
44,449 |
|
|
$ |
83,732 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Capital lease commitments
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Co-marketing commitments
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchase obligations
|
|
|
161,500 |
|
|
|
161,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating lease commitments
|
|
|
110,462 |
|
|
|
22,709 |
|
|
|
19,031 |
|
|
|
16,582 |
|
|
|
13,779 |
|
|
|
10,634 |
|
|
|
27,727 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
566,521 |
|
|
$ |
302,681 |
|
|
$ |
66,937 |
|
|
$ |
61,031 |
|
|
$ |
97,511 |
|
|
$ |
10,634 |
|
|
$ |
27,727 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The purchase obligations above, do not include purchase
obligations recorded on the balance sheet as current
liabilities. Purchase obligations for the purchase of goods or
services are defined as agreements that are enforceable and
legally binding on Symbol and that specify all significant
terms, including fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased,
fixed, minimum or variable prices provisions, and the
appropriate timing of the transaction. Our purchase orders are
based on our current manufacturing needs and are generally
fulfilled by our vendors within a short time frame.
Currently, our primary source of liquidity is cash flow from
operations and the new credit facility. Our primary liquidity
requirements continue to be working capital, engineering costs,
and financing and investing activities.
Our ability to fund planned capital expenditures and to make
payments on and to refinance our indebtedness will depend on our
ability to generate cash in the future. This, to a certain
extent, is subject to general economic, financial, competitive,
legislative, regulatory and other factors that are beyond our
control. Based on our current level of operations, we believe
our cash flow from operations, available cash and available
borrowings under our new credit facility will be adequate to
meet our future liquidity needs for the next 12 months.
We may also be required to make future cash outlays in
connection with outstanding legal contingencies. These potential
cash outlays could be material and might affect liquidity
requirements and cause us to pursue additional financing. We
cannot assure you, however, that our business will generate
sufficient cash flow from operations or that future borrowings
will be available to us under our new credit facility in an
amount sufficient to enable us to fund these and our other
liquidity needs or pay our indebtedness.
Critical accounting estimates and judgments
The preparation of financial statements and related disclosures
in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America requires us to make judgments,
assumptions and estimates that affect the reported amounts of
assets, liabilities, revenue and expenses, as well as the
disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities.
67
On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates and judgments,
including those related to product return reserves, allowance
for doubtful accounts, legal contingencies, inventory valuation,
warranty reserves, useful lives of long-lived assets, goodwill,
derivative instrument valuations and income taxes. We base our
estimates and judgments on historical experience and on various
other factors that we believe to be reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making
judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities
that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results
may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or
conditions.
We believe the following critical accounting policies affect the
more significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation
of our Consolidated Financial Statements:
Product return reserves and allowance for doubtful
accounts
We record as reductions of revenue provisions for estimated
product returns. The estimated amount is based on historical
experience of similar products sold to our customers and then
returned. If our product mix or customer base changes
significantly, this could result in a change to our future
estimated product return reserve. Management believes the
reserve for product returns is adequate to cover anticipated
credits issued for such returns; however, if future returns
differ from our historical experience and estimates, then this
could result in an increase in the reserve. An increase of one
percent in the reserve percentage would result in an increase in
our estimated product return reserve of approximately $1,800 as
of December 31, 2004.
We record accounts receivable, net of an allowance for doubtful
accounts. Throughout the year, we estimate our ability to
collect outstanding receivables and establish an allowance for
doubtful accounts. In doing so, we evaluate the age of our
receivables, past collection history, current financial
conditions for key customers, and economic conditions. Based on
this evaluation, we establish a reserve for specific accounts
receivable that we believe are uncollectible. A deterioration in
the financial condition of any key customer or a significant
slowing in the economy could have a material negative impact on
our ability to collect a portion or all of the accounts
receivable. We believe that analysis of historical trends and
current knowledge of potential collection problems provides us
significant information to establish a reasonable estimate for
an allowance for doubtful accounts. However, since we cannot
predict with certainty future changes in the financial stability
of our customers, our actual future losses from uncollectible
accounts may differ from our estimates, which could have an
adverse effect on our financial condition and results of
operations.
Legal contingencies
We are currently involved in certain legal proceedings and
accruals are established when we are able to estimate the
probable outcome of these matters in accordance with Statements
of Financial Accounting Standards No. 5 Accounting
for Contingencies. Such estimates of outcome are derived
from consultation with in-house and outside legal counsel, as
well as an assessment of litigation and settlement strategies.
In many cases, outcomes of such matters are determined by third
parties, including governmental entities and judicial bodies.
Any provisions made in our financial statements, as well as
related disclosures, represent managements best estimates
of the current status of such matters and its potential outcome
based on a review of the facts and in consultation with in-house
and outside legal counsel. Our estimates may change from period
to period based on changes in facts and circumstances, process
of negotiations in settling matters and changes determined by
management. As further described under the caption
Item 3. Legal Proceedings, we are in litigation
with SmartMedia of Delaware, Inc. Currently, we do not have a
liability recorded on our balance sheet related to this matter
as we believe an unfavorable outcome is not probable. However,
should circumstances change due to new developments related to
this matter changes in our estimates may need to be made and
recorded amounts and costs could be material.
Inventory valuation
We record our inventories at the lower of historical cost or
market value. In assessing the ultimate realization of recorded
amounts, we are required to make judgments as to future demand
requirements and compare these with the current or committed
inventory levels. Projected demand levels, economic conditions,
68
business restructurings, technological innovation and product
life cycles are variables we assess when determining our reserve
for excess and obsolete inventories. We have experienced
significant changes in required reserves in recent periods due
to these variables. At the end of 2002 and 2003, our inventory
reserves were estimated at $170,057 or 39.4% of gross inventory
and $109,331 or 33.9% of gross inventory respectively. As of
December 31, 2004 such reserves have been reduced to
$55,247 or 20.6% of gross inventory. The reduction of reserves
was the result of the write off and scrapping of inventory and
the sale of inventory.
In addition, should future demand requirements change after a
reserve has been established, there is the possibility that we
could have future sales of product that has been previously
reserved. This occurred in 2003, when a sale of approximately
$10,000 was recorded on inventory in the fourth quarter of 2003,
which was fully reserved for in prior periods. While we continue
to believe that our recorded reserves and policy for determining
the reserve requirement are appropriate, it is possible that
significant changes in required inventory reserves may continue
to occur in the future if there is a deterioration in market
conditions or acceleration in technological change and we may
experience future sales of product that may be reserved for
based on our analysis of future demands and past experiences.
Warranty reserves
We provide standard warranty coverage for most of our products
for a period of one year from the date of shipment. We record a
liability for estimated warranty claims based on historical
claims, product failure rates and other factors. This liability
primarily includes the anticipated cost of materials, labor and
shipping necessary to repair and service the equipment. Our
warranty obligation is affected by the products actually under
warranty, product failure rates, material usage rates, and the
efficiency by which the product failure is corrected. Should our
warranty policy change or should actual failure rates, material
usage and labor efficiencies differ from our estimates,
revisions to the estimated warranty liability would be required.
A five percent increase in our products under warranty would
cause an approximate $850 increase to our warranty provision at
December 31, 2004.
Useful lives of long-lived assets
We estimate the useful lives of our long-lived assets, including
property, plant and equipment, identifiable finite life
intangible assets and software development costs for internal
use in order to determine the amount of depreciation and
amortization expense to be recorded during any reporting period.
The estimated lives are based on historical experience with
similar assets as well as taking into consideration anticipated
technological or other changes. If technological changes were to
occur more rapidly or slowly than anticipated, or in a different
form, useful lives may need to be changed accordingly, resulting
in either an increase or decrease in depreciation and
amortization expense. We review these assets annually or
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the
carrying value may not be recoverable. Factors we consider
important and that could trigger an impairment review include
significant changes in the manner of our use of the acquired
asset, technological advances, changes in historical or
projected operating performance and cash flows and significant
negative economic trends.
Goodwill impairments
Our methodology for allocating the purchase price relating to
purchase acquisitions is determined through established
valuation techniques in the high-technology mobile computing
industry. Goodwill is measured as the excess of the cost of
acquisition over the sum of the amounts assigned to tangible and
identifiable intangible assets acquired less liabilities
assumed. We test on an annual basis or more frequently if an
event occurs or circumstances change that indicate a potential
impairment may exist to its carrying value. In response to
changes in industry and market conditions, we could be required
to strategically realign our resources and consider
restructuring, disposing of, or otherwise exiting businesses,
which could result in an impairment of goodwill.
69
Derivative instruments, hedging activities and foreign
currency
We utilize derivative financial instruments to hedge foreign
exchange rate risk exposures related to foreign currency
denominated payments from our international subsidiaries. We
also utilize a derivative financial instrument to hedge
fluctuations in the fair value of our investment in Cisco common
shares. Our foreign exchange derivatives qualify for hedge
accounting in accordance with the provisions of
SFAS No. 133. We do not participate in speculative
derivatives trading. While we intend to continue to meet the
conditions for hedge accounting, if hedges did not qualify as
highly effective, or if we did not believe the forecasted
transactions would occur, the changes in fair value of the
derivatives used as hedges would be reflected in earnings and
could be material.
Income Taxes
Assessment of the appropriate amount and classification of
income taxes are dependent on several factors, including
estimates of the timing and probability of the realization of
deferred income taxes and the timing of tax payments. Deferred
income taxes are provided for the effect of temporary
differences between the amounts of assets and liabilities
recognized for financial reporting purposes and the amounts
recognized for income tax purposes. We measure deferred tax
assets and liabilities using enacted tax rates, that if changed,
would result in either an increase or decrease in the reported
income taxes in the period of change. A valuation allowance is
recorded when it is more likely than not that a deferred tax
asset will not be realized. In assessing the likelihood of
realization, management considers estimates of future taxable
income, the character of income needed to realize future tax
benefits, and other available evidence.
Our assessment of future taxable income is based on historical
results, exclusive of non-recurring or unusual charges and
managements assessment of future taxable income and other
known transactions which would result in taxable income.
Three forecasts of future sources of taxable income were
prepared based on various assumptions concerning the growth of
the Companys business operations that are subject to
income tax in the United States. The reversal of all significant
timing differences was considered in calculating the forecasted
taxable income under each scenario. The estimated income tax
payable was then calculated based on the tax rates in effect as
of December 31, 2004. Tax credits (including a forecast of
expected tax credits that will arise in each year of the
forecast) were then applied to reduce the tax, subject to
existing limitations under the applicable tax laws. Based on
these forecasts, substantially all of the deferred tax assets
would be utilized well before the underlying tax
attributes expiration periods.
We have had a number of isolated items in the past that have had
a negative impact on our taxable income, however, we do not
expect these items to recur in the future. We are projecting
taxable income in the future.
Actual income taxes could vary from estimated amounts due to
future impacts of various items, including changes in tax laws,
positions taken by governmental authorities relative to the
deductibility of certain expenses we incur, changes in our
financial condition and results of operations, as well as final
review of our tax returns by various taxing authorities that are
under audit in the normal course of buiness.
Our critical accounting policies have been reviewed with the
Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.
Recently issued accounting pronouncements
On December 16, 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards
Board (FASB) issued FASB Statement No. 123 (revised
2004), Share-Based Payment, (Statement 123(R))
which is a revision of FASB Statement No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.
Statement 123(R) supersedes APB Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and amends FASB
Statement No. 95, Statement of Cash Flows.
Generally, the approach in Statement 123(R) is similar to
the approach described in Statement 123. However,
Statement 123(R) requires all share-based payments
to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be
recognized in the income statement based on their fair values.
70
Statement 123(R) must be adopted no later than July 1,
2005. Early adoption will be permitted in periods in which
financial statements have not yet been issued. We expect to
adopt Statement 123(R) on July 1, 2005.
Statement 123(R) permits public companies to adopt its
requirements using one of two methods:
|
|
|
1. A modified prospective method in which
compensation cost is recognized beginning with the effective
date (a) based on the requirements of Statement 123(R)
for all share-based payments granted after the effective date
and (b) based on the requirements of Statement 123(R)
for all awards granted to employees prior to the effective date
of Statement 123(R) that remain unvested on the effective
date. |
|
|
2. A modified retrospective method which
includes the requirements of the modified prospective method
described above, but also permits entities to restate based on
the amounts previously recognized under Statement 123(R)
for purposes of pro forma disclosures either (a) all prior
periods presented or (b) prior interim periods of the year
of adoption. |
We plan to adopt Statement 123(R) using the
modified-prospective method.
As permitted by Statement 123(R), we currently account for
share-based payments to employees using APB Opinion
No. 25s intrinsic value method and, as such,
generally recognize no compensation cost for employee stock
options granted under our option plans. Accordingly, the
adoption of Statement 123(R)s fair value method will
have a significant impact on our result of operations, although
it will have no impact on our overall financial position. The
impact of adoption of Statement 123(R) cannot be predicted
at this time because it will depend on levels of share-based
payments granted in the future. However, had we adopted
Statement 123(R) in prior periods, the impact of that
standard would have approximated the impact of
Statement 123(R) as described in the disclosure of pro
forma net income and earnings per share in Note 1 to our
consolidated financial statements. Statement 123(R) also
requires the benefits of tax deductions in excess of recognized
compensation cost to be reported as a financing cash flow,
rather than as an operating cash flow as required under current
literature. This requirement will reduce net operating cash
flows and increase net financing cash flows in periods after
adoption. While we cannot estimate what those amounts will be in
the future (because they depend on, among other things, when
employees exercise stock options), the amount of operating cash
flows recognized in prior periods for such tax deductions were
$25,665, $439 and $139 in 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
Based on the release of Statement 123(R), we plan on
amending our Employee Stock Purchase Program (ESPP)
to reduce the discount of the price of the shares purchased by
employees in the ESPP from its current discount of 15% to a
discount of 5%, and we will also eliminate the look-back period
currently utilized to determine the price of the shares
purchased. These changes will allow the ESPP to continue to be
non compensatory, which will result in no compensation expense
to be recorded by us in our statement of operations when we
implement Statement 123(R).
|
|
Item 7A. |
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market
Risk. |
We are exposed to various market risks, including changes in
foreign currency exchange rates and interest rates. Market risk
is the potential loss arising from adverse changes in market
rates and prices. We have a formal policy that prohibits the use
of currency derivatives or other financial instruments for
trading or speculative purposes. The policy permits the use of
financial instruments to manage and reduce the impact of changes
in foreign currency exchange rates that may arise in the normal
course of our business. Currently, we do not use any financial
instruments to manage our interest rate risk. The counterparties
in derivative transactions that we have entered into are major
financial institutions with ratings of A or better, as
determined by one of the major credit rating services.
We enter into forward foreign exchange contracts and foreign
currency loans principally to hedge the currency fluctuations in
transactions denominated in foreign currencies, thereby limiting
our risk that would otherwise result from changes in exchange
rates. During 2004, the principal transactions hedged were
short-term intercompany sales. The periods of the forward
foreign exchange contracts and foreign currency loans correspond
to the periods of the hedged transactions. Gains and losses on
forward foreign exchange contracts
71
and foreign currency loans and the offsetting losses and gains
on hedged transactions are reflected as a component of operating
results in our consolidated statements of operations.
A large percentage of our sales are transacted in local
currencies. As a result, our international operating results are
subject to foreign exchange rate fluctuations. A 5%
strengthening of the U.S. dollar against every applicable
foreign currency would have had a $23,219 negative impact on our
revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004, while a 5%
weakening of the U.S. dollar against every applicable
foreign currency would have had a $25,663 positive impact on our
revenue for the year ended December 31, 2004. We did not
use foreign exchange contracts to hedge expected revenue for the
year ended December 31, 2004. However, we acquire a portion
of our raw materials using local currencies. The strengthening
or weakening of the U.S. dollar against local currency
would act as a partial offset to the impact on revenue.
We manufacture a significant portion of our products at our
Mexico facility and we generally invoice our international
subsidiaries in their local currency for finished and
semi-finished goods. As a result, our U.S. dollar cash flow
is subject to foreign exchange rate fluctuations. As of
December 31, 2004, a 5% strengthening of the
U.S. dollar against every applicable currency would have
had a $11,937 negative impact on the value of the realized cash
remittances from our subsidiaries during the year ended
December 31, 2004, while a 5% weakening of the
U.S. dollar against every applicable currency would have
had a $13,193 positive impact on the value of the realized cash
remittances from our subsidiaries. We routinely use foreign
exchange contracts to hedge cash flows that are either firm
commitments or those which may be forecasted to occur.
While components and supplies are generally available from a
variety of sources, we currently depend on a single source or a
limited number of suppliers for several components of our
equipment, certain subassemblies and certain of our products. A
loss of one of these suppliers may have an adverse effect on our
ability to deliver our products or to deliver them on time or to
manufacture them at anticipated cost levels. However, due to the
general availability of components and supplies, we do not
believe that the loss of any supplier or subassembly
manufacturer would have a long-term material adverse effect on
our business, although set-up costs and delays could occur in
the short term if we changed any single source supplier.
We currently hold an investment in Cisco common stock, which is
accounted for in accordance with SFAS No. 115. At
December 31, 2004, 3,411.2 shares are classified as
trading securities and 748.8 shares are classified as
available for sale securities. They are carried at fair market
value based on their quoted market price. As such, we have
exposure to market risk related to the fluctuation of
Ciscos stock price. However, the change in fair value of
the Cisco stock price is mitigated by the change in fair value
of the embedded equity collar contained in the SAILS
arrangement. As of December 31, 2004, a 10% increase in the
risk free interest rate used to value the option would have a
negative earnings impact of $1,690, while a 10% increase in the
assumed volatility used to value the option would have a
positive earnings impact of $690.
|
|
Item 8. |
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. |
The information in response to this Item 8 is included in
the Consolidated Financial Statements and notes thereto, and
related Independent Auditors Reports, beginning on page F-1.
|
|
Item 9. |
Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on
Accounting and Financial Disclosure. |
On March 25, 2004, the audit committee of the board of
directors of Symbol approved the appointment of Ernst &
Young LLP (Ernst & Young) as Symbols
independent auditors and the dismissal of Deloitte &
Touche LLP (Deloitte & Touche), which had
previously served in this capacity. On April 27, 2004, the
appointment of Ernst & Young was approved and ratified
by stockholder vote.
During the years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 and the
subsequent interim period through March 25, 2004, Symbol
did not consult with Ernst & Young regarding the
application of accounting principles to a specified transaction,
either completed or proposed, the type of audit opinion that
might be rendered on Symbols consolidated financial
statements, or any matter that was the subject of disagreement
or a reportable event as set forth in Items 304(a)(2)(i)
and (ii) of Regulation S-K.
72
The audit reports of Deloitte & Touche on Symbols
consolidated financial statements for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002 did not contain an adverse
opinion or a disclaimer of opinion and were not qualified or
modified as to uncertainty, audit scope or accounting
principles. Deloitte & Touches audit report on
Symbols consolidated financial statements for such years
includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the change in
method of accounting in 2002 for goodwill and other intangibles
to conform to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(Statement) No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets.
During the fiscal years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002
and the subsequent interim period through March 25, 2004,
there were no disagreements between Symbol and
Deloitte & Touche on any matter of accounting
principles or practices, financial statement disclosure or
auditing scope or procedure, which disagreement, if not resolved
to the satisfaction of Deloitte & Touche, would have
caused Deloitte & Touche to make reference to the
subject matter of the disagreement in connection with their
reports, except that, subsequent to the issuance of
Symbols 2002 consolidated financial statements,
Deloitte & Touche advised Symbol that it believed that
the accounting treatment afforded to an available for sale
security for which an other than temporary impairment charge was
recorded in the second quarter of 2002 should be revised.
Deloitte & Touche advised Symbol that it believed that
an other than temporary impairment of such investment should
have been recognized in 2001. Symbol disagreed with
Deloitte & Touches conclusions with respect to
this matter. This accounting matter was resolved, Symbol revised
the accounting treatment for this investment and reissued its
2002 financial statements in an amended filing of its 2002
Annual Report on Form 10-K/ A (Amendment No. 1) on
February 25, 2004.
During the two fiscal years ended December 31, 2003 and
2002 and the subsequent interim period through March 25,
2004, Deloitte & Touche reported to Symbols audit
committee that Deloitte & Touche considered matters
involving Symbols internal controls and their operation to
be material weaknesses as follows:
(1) In connection with its audit of the consolidated
financial statements of Symbol for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2002, Deloitte & Touche reported to
the audit committee the following material weaknesses:
|
|
|
|
|
decentralized accounting structure for operations in the United
States; |
|
|
|
inadequate policies and processes for identifying complex
non-standard transactions, including restructurings and
acquisitions; |
|
|
|
inadequate hiring of qualified and experienced personnel; |
|
|
|
inadequate training and supervision of personnel; |
|
|
|
inadequate systems and systems interfaces; |
|
|
|
errors related to the processing of stock option exercises; |
|
|
|
errors related to the timing and amount of revenue recognized; |
|
|
|
errors in the timing and recording of certain reserves,
including excess and obsolete inventory; |
|
|
|
inadequate support and approval for numerous manual journal
entries; and |
|
|
|
informal and inconsistent policies and procedures related to
account reconciliations. |
(2) In connection with its audit of the consolidated
financial statements of Symbol for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2003, Deloitte & Touche reported that
a material weakness exists related to the manner in which Symbol
processes transactions to record revenue. Additionally,
Deloitte & Touche reported that deficiencies exist
relating to the adequacy and timeliness of account
reconciliations, formalized worldwide policies and procedures
and the amount of manual journal entries required to record
transactions.
Symbol has authorized Deloitte & Touche to respond
fully to inquiries of Ernst & Young concerning the
reportable events discussed above.
73
Deloitte & Touche, the member firms of Deloitte Touche
Tohmatsu and their respective affiliates may continue to be
engaged by Symbol or its subsidiaries in non-audit capacities
now or in the future.
|
|
Item 9A. |
Controls and Procedures. |
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this report, we carried
out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the
participation of our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the
design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures
as this term is defined under Rule 13a 15(e)
promulgated under the Securities Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act). Based upon this evaluation, our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of
December 31, 2004.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
In November 2004, during the Companys inventory testing
(including a planned physical inventory at a company owned
distribution center), two unrelated errors were discovered.
These errors were the result of two discrete events. One event
involved inaccurate inventory levels reported to the Company by
a large distribution partner. The underreported inventory levels
resulted in the Company inaccurately reporting
$3.287 million in revenues in its earnings release on
October 26, 2004 for the three- and nine-month period ended
September 30, 2004. No previous periods were affected. This
was an oversight on the part of the distribution partner, which
made the Company aware of the reporting error as soon as it was
discovered. The second discrepancy was the result of errors that
occurred at a Company-owned distribution facility that serves
one of the Companys large retail customers. The
distribution center relies on its own internal reporting system
and misreported inventory. As a result of this second
discrepancy, the Company over reported revenue by
$10.25 million for the three- and nine- month period ended
September 30, 2004 in its earnings release on
October 26, 2004. Based on these findings, management
believed it had significant deficiencies relating to the
controls for receiving, shipping and ultimately reporting the
amount of inventory. The errors reported as described above led
to the delay, but timely, filing of the Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q as of and for the three- and nine- month period
ended September 30, 2004.
Since the discovery of the significant deficiencies in November
2004 as described above, we have taken the following steps to
improve our internal controls:
|
|
|
|
|
placed qualified individuals in the distribution center to
manage the movement of inventory within the distribution center; |
|
|
|
performed physical inventory procedures at December 31,
2004, and will perform physical inventory counts quarterly
thereafter, at certain of our distributors and our Company-owned
distribution center to ensure the value of consigned inventory
at our distributors and our Company-owned distribution center
are accurately recorded; and |
|
|
|
performed monthly roll-forwards of inventory at
November 30, 2004, and will perform monthly roll-forwards
thereafter, at our distributors and Company owned distribution
center. |
Other than as described above, there has been no change in the
Companys internal control over financial reporting during
the fourth quarter of our fiscal year ended December 31,
2004 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect the Companys internal control over
financial reporting.
Managements Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
Management of the Company is responsible for establishing and
maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting
for the Company. The Company maintains accounting and internal
control systems which are designed to (1) maintain records
that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the
transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company;
(2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are
recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with accounting
74
principles generally accepted in the United States, and that
receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in
accordance with authorizations of management and directors of
the Company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding
prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use,
or disposition of the Companys assets that could have a
material effect on the financial statements.
As of December 31, 2004, management conducted an assessment
of the effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting based on the framework established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission. Based on this assessment, management has determined
that the Companys internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2004 is effective.
The Company acquired Matrics in September 2004. Excluded from
the Companys assessment of internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2004, is the internal control
over financial reporting of Matrics. Matrics had net assets of
$44 million (excluding $194 million of goodwill
resulting from the purchase of Matrics) and an immaterial amount
of revenues and net income as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2004.
Managements assessment of the effectiveness of the
Companys internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2004 has been audited by Ernst &
Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as
stated in their report included on page F-3 of this report.
|
|
Item 9B. |
Other Information. |
Not applicable.
Part III
|
|
Item 10. |
Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant. |
The information regarding Directors and Executive Officers
appearing under the headings Proposal 1: Election of
Directors and Section 16(a) Beneficial
Ownership Reporting Compliance of our 2005 Proxy Statement
is incorporated by reference in this section. The information
under the heading Executive Officers of the
Registrant in Item 4A of this Form 10-K is also
incorporated by reference in this section.
Our Chief Executive Officer made the Annual Certification
required by Section 303A.12(a) of the New York Stock
Exchange Company Manual on May 10, 2004. In addition,
Symbol has filed with the SEC as Exhibits 31.1 and 31.2,
respectively, to this Form 10-K the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
Section 302 certifications of its Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer relating to the quality of its
public disclosure.
We have adopted a code of ethics that applies to our principal
executive officer and all members of our finance department,
including the principal financial officer and principal
accounting officer. This code of ethics, which is contained in
our Statement of Corporate Policy and Code of Conduct and
applies to employees generally, is posted on our Investor
Relations portion of our Website
(http://www.symbol.com/investors). The code of
ethics may be found by clicking on the link entitled
Company Charters and Corporate Governance
Policies and then the link entitled Corporate
Policy and Code of Conduct.
|
|
Item 11. |
Executive Compensation. |
The information appearing under the headings Executive
Compensation, Option Grants in Last Fiscal
Year, Option Exercises and Fiscal Year-End
Values, Employment Agreements, Equity
Compensation Plans, 401(k) Plan,
Executive Retirement Plan, Equity Compensation
Plan Information, and Compensation Committee
Interlocks and Insider Participation of the 2005 Proxy
Statement is incorporated by reference.
75
|
|
Item 12. |
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management. |
The information appearing in our 2005 Proxy Statement under the
heading Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners
and Management is incorporated by reference.
|
|
Item 13. |
Certain Relationships and Related Transactions. |
The information appearing in our 2005 Proxy Statement under the
heading Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions is incorporated by reference.
|
|
Item 14. |
Principal Accounting Fees and Services. |
The information appearing in our 2005 Proxy Statement under the
headings Report of the Audit Committee of the Board of
Directors, Fees to Independent Auditors for Fiscal
2004 and 2003 and Appointment of Certified Public
Accountants is incorporated by reference.
Part IV
|
|
Item 15. |
Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules. |
(a) 1. Financial Statements
The information in response to this Item 15(a)1 is included
in the Consolidated Financial Statements and notes thereto, and
related Independent Auditors Report, beginning on page
F-1. Individual financial statements of the subsidiaries of
Symbol are omitted as Symbol is primarily an operating company
and the subsidiaries included in the Consolidated Financial
Statements filed are substantially wholly owned and are not
indebted to any person other than the parent in amounts which
exceed 5 percent of total consolidated assets at the date
of the latest balance sheet filed, excepting indebtedness
incurred in the ordinary course of business which is not overdue
and which matures within one year from the date of its creation,
whether evidenced by securities or not, and indebtedness which
is collateralized by the parent by guarantee, pledge, assignment
or otherwise.
2. Financial Statement Schedules
The information in response to this Item 15(a)2 is included
in the Consolidated Financial Statements and notes thereto, and
related Independent Auditors Report, beginning on page
F-1. Other schedules are omitted because of the absence of
conditions under which they are required or because the required
information is given in the Consolidated Financial Statements or
notes thereto.
3. Exhibits
Exhibits required to be attached by Item 601 of
Regulation S-K are listed in the Exhibit Index
attached hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference.
76
|
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
2 |
.1 |
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger by and among Symbol, Marvin
Acquisition Corp. and Matrics, dated as of July 26, 2004
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Current
Report on Form 8-K dated September 15, 2004) |
|
|
3 |
.1 |
|
Certificate of Incorporation of Symbol Technologies, Inc., as
amended (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to
Symbols Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1999 (the 1999 Form 10-K) |
|
|
3 |
.2 |
|
Amended and Restated By-Laws of Symbol (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K
dated March 4, 2005) |
|
|
4 |
.1 |
|
Form of Certificate for Shares of the Common Stock of Symbol
(Incorporated by reference to Symbols Form SE on
March 3, 1999) |
|
|
4 |
.2 |
|
Rights Agreement, dated as of August 13, 2001, between
Symbol and The Bank of New York, as Rights Agent, which includes
the Form of Certificate of Designations with respect to the
Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock as
Exhibit A, the Form of Right Certificate as Exhibit B
and the Summary of Rights to Purchase Shares of Preferred Stock
as Exhibit C (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4
to Symbols Current Report on Form 8-K dated
August 21, 2001) |
|
|
10 |
.1 |
|
Form of 2008 Stock Purchase Warrant issued to certain directors
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1997) |
|
|
10 |
.2 |
|
1994 Directors Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Registration Statement
No. 33-78678 on Form S-8) |
|
10 |
.3 |
|
2000 Directors Stock Option Plan, as amended and
restated (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2004) |
|
|
10 |
.4 |
|
2002 Directors Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Registration Statement
No. 333-89668 on Form S-8) |
|
|
10 |
.5 |
|
1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as amended (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.3 to Registration Statement
No. 333-89668 on Form S-8) |
|
|
10 |
.6 |
|
1997 Employee Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 to Registration Statement No. 333-73322 on
Form S-8) |
|
|
10 |
.7 |
|
1991 Employee Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991) |
|
|
10 |
.8 |
|
1990 Non-Executive Stock Option Plan, as amended (Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Symbols Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1995 (the
1995 Form 10-K)) |
|
|
10 |
.9 |
|
2001 Non-Executive Stock Option Plan, as amended and restated
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 on
Form 10-K/ A for the year ended December 31, 2002) |
|
|
10 |
.10 |
|
Telxon Corporation 1990 Employee Stock Option Plan (Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.9 of Symbols Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 (the
2002 Form 10-K)) |
|
|
10 |
.11 |
|
Symbol Technologies, Inc. Executive Bonus Plan, as amended and
restated (Incorporated by referenced to Exhibit 10.2 to the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2004) |
|
|
10 |
.12 |
|
Symbol Technologies, Inc. 2004 Equity Incentive Award Plan
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2004) |
|
|
10 |
.13 |
|
Telxon Corporation 1990 Non-Employee Stock Option Plan
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 of the 2002
Form 10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.14 |
|
2001 Non-Executive Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.8 of Symbols Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000 (the
2000 Form 10-K)) |
|
|
10 |
.15 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and Jerome Swartz,
dated as of July 1, 2000 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.9 to the 2000 Form 10-K) |
77
|
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
10 |
.16 |
|
Separation, Release and Employment Agreement by and between
Symbol and Jerome Swartz, dated as of July 7, 2003
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 of the 2002
Form 10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.17 |
|
Settlement Agreement by and between Symbol and Jerome Swartz,
dated as of June 1, 2004 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.17 to Symbols Registration Statement on
Form S-1 (File No. 333-119076) filed
September 16, 2004 (the Form S-1)) |
|
|
10 |
.18 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and Leonard R.
Goldner, dated as of December 15, 2000 (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the 2000 Form 10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.19 |
|
Without Prejudice Resignation Agreement by and between Symbol
and Leonard Goldner, dated as of June 30, 2003
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the 2002
10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.20 |
|
Tolling Agreement by and between Symbol and Leonard Goldner,
dated as of June 9, 2004 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004) |
|
|
10 |
.21 |
|
Agreement by and between Symbol and Leonard Goldner, dated as of
October 13, 2004, to extend tolling period under the
Tolling Agreement, dated as of June 9, 2004 (Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to Symbols Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2004) |
|
|
10 |
.22 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and William R. Nuti,
dated as of March 31, 2004 (Incorporated by referenced to
Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols Report on Form 8-K filed on
April 1, 2004) |
|
|
10 |
.23 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and William R. Nuti,
dated as of July 15, 2002 (Incorporated herein by reference
to Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002) |
|
|
10 |
.24 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and Richard Bravman,
dated as of August 1, 2002 (Incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002) |
|
|
10 |
.25 |
|
Letter Agreement by and between Symbol and Richard Bravman,
dated as of March 1, 2004 (Incorporated herein by reference
to Exhibit 10.19 of Symbols Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 the
2003 Form 10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.26 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and Tomo Razmilovic,
dated as of February 14, 2002 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit to the 2001 Form 10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.27 |
|
Separation, Release and Non-Disclosure Agreement between Symbol
and Tomo Razmilovic, dated as of February 14, 2002
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to the 2001
Form 10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.28 |
|
Tolling Agreement by and between Symbol and Tomo Razmilovic,
dated as of May 6, 2003 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.20 to the 2002 Form 10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.29 |
|
Agreement by and between Symbol and Tomo Razmilovic, dated as of
March 18, 2004, to extend tolling period under the Tolling
Agreement, dated as of May 6, 2003 (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.27 to the Form S-1) |
|
|
10 |
.30 |
|
Executive Retirement Plan, as amended (Incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.2 to Symbols Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002) |
|
|
10 |
.31 |
|
2002 Executive Stock Ownership and Option Retention Program,
dated as of December 16, 2002 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.22 of the 2002 Form 10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.32 |
|
Summary of Symbol Technologies, Inc. Executive Bonus Plan
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 of the 1999
Form 10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.33 |
|
Credit Agreement, dated as of December 29, 2004, among
Symbol, the lenders identified therein, JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., in its capacity as administrative and collateral agent,
Fleet National Bank, as syndication agent, and J.P. Morgan
Securities, Inc. and Banc of America Securities LLC, as co-lead
arrangers and joint bookrunners (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated
December 29, 2004) |
|
|
10 |
.34 |
|
Guarantee and Collateral Agreement, dated as of
December 29, 2004, among Symbol, the material subsidiaries
therein and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., in its capacity as
collateral agent (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2
to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 29,
2004) |
78
|
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
Letter, dated March 31, 2004, from Deloitte &
Touche LLP to the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 16.1 of
the Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 1, 2004) |
|
|
21* |
|
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
23 |
.1* |
|
Consent of Ernst & Young LLP |
|
|
23 |
.2* |
|
Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP |
|
|
31 |
.1* |
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
31 |
.2* |
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
32 |
.1* |
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 |
|
32 |
.2* |
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 |
* Filed herewith.
79
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. |
|
(Registrant) |
|
|
|
|
|
William R. Nuti |
|
President and Chief Executive Officer |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1934, this
report has been signed by the following persons in the
capacities and as of the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Salvatore Iannuzzi
Salvatore
Iannuzzi |
|
Director, Chairman of the Board of Directors |
|
March 11, 2005 |
|
/s/ Robert J. Chrenc
Robert
J. Chrenc |
|
Director |
|
March 11, 2005 |
|
/s/ Edward Kozel
Edward
Kozel |
|
Director |
|
March 11, 2005 |
|
/s/ William R. Nuti
William
R. Nuti |
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (principal
executive officer) |
|
March 11, 2005 |
|
/s/ George Samenuk
George
Samenuk |
|
Director |
|
March 11, 2005 |
|
/s/ Melvin A. Yellin
Melvin
A. Yellin |
|
Director |
|
March 11, 2005 |
|
/s/ Mark T. Greenquist
Mark
T. Greenquist |
|
Senior Vice President Finance and Chief Financial
Officer (principal financial officer) |
|
March 11, 2005 |
|
/s/ James M. Conboy
James
M. Conboy |
|
Vice President Controller and Chief Accounting
Officer (principal accounting officer) |
|
March 11, 2005 |
80
Exhibit index
|
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
2 |
.1 |
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger by and among Symbol, Marvin
Acquisition Corp. and Matrics, dated as of July 26,
2004 (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the
Current Report on Form 8-K dated September 15, 2004) |
|
|
3 |
.1 |
|
Certificate of Incorporation of Symbol Technologies, Inc., as
amended (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 to
Symbols Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1999 (the 1999 Form 10-K) |
|
|
3 |
.2 |
|
Amended and Restated By-Laws of Symbol (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 3.1 to the Current Report on
Form 8-K dated March 4, 2005) |
|
|
4 |
.1 |
|
Form of Certificate for Shares of the Common Stock of Symbol
(Incorporated by reference to Symbols Form SE on
March 3, 1999) |
|
|
4 |
.2 |
|
Rights Agreement, dated as of August 13, 2001, between
Symbol and The Bank of New York, as Rights Agent, which includes
the Form of Certificate of Designations with respect to the
Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock as
Exhibit A, the Form of Right Certificate as Exhibit B
and the Summary of Rights to Purchase Shares of Preferred Stock
as Exhibit C (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4
to Symbols Current Report on Form 8-K dated
August 21, 2001) |
|
|
10 |
.1 |
|
Form of 2008 Stock Purchase Warrant issued to certain directors
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols
Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1997) |
|
|
10 |
.2 |
|
1994 Directors Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Registration Statement
No. 33-78678 on Form S-8) |
|
|
10 |
.3 |
|
2000 Directors Stock Option Plan, as amended and
restated (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2004) |
|
|
10 |
.4 |
|
2002 Directors Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.1 to Registration Statement
No. 333-89668 on Form S-8) |
|
|
10 |
.5 |
|
1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan, as amended (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 4.3 to Registration Statement
No. 333-89668 on Form S-8) |
|
|
10 |
.6 |
|
1997 Employee Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.2 to Registration Statement No. 333-73322 on
Form S-8) |
|
|
10 |
.7 |
|
1991 Employee Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1991) |
|
|
10 |
.8 |
|
1990 Non-Executive Stock Option Plan, as amended (Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.1 of Symbols Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1995 (the
1995 Form 10-K)) |
|
|
10 |
.9 |
|
2001 Non-Executive Stock Option Plan, as amended and restated
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 on
Form 10-K/ A for the year ended December 31, 2002) |
|
|
10 |
.10 |
|
Telxon Corporation 1990 Employee Stock Option Plan (Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.9 of Symbols Annual Report
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 (the
2002 Form 10-K)) |
|
|
10 |
.11 |
|
Symbol Technologies, Inc. Executive Bonus Plan, as amended and
restated (Incorporated by referenced to Exhibit 10.2 to the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2004) |
|
|
10 |
.12 |
|
Symbol Technologies, Inc. 2004 Equity Incentive Award Plan
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31,
2004) |
|
|
10 |
.13 |
|
Telxon Corporation 1990 Non-Employee Stock Option Plan
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 of the 2002
Form 10-K) |
|
|
10 |
.14 |
|
2001 Non-Executive Stock Option Plan (Incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.8 of Symbols Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2000 (the
2000 Form 10-K)) |
|
|
10 |
.15 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and Jerome Swartz,
dated as of July 1, 2000 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.9 to the 2000 Form 10-K) |
81
|
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
10 |
.16 |
|
Separation, Release and Employment Agreement by and between
Symbol and Jerome Swartz, dated as of July 7, 2003
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 of the 2002
Form 10-K) |
|
10 |
.17 |
|
Settlement Agreement by and between Symbol and Jerome Swartz,
dated as of June 1, 2004 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.17 to Symbols Registration Statement on
Form S-1 (File No. 333-119076) filed
September 16, 2004 (the Form S-1)) |
|
10 |
.18 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and Leonard R.
Goldner, dated as of December 15, 2000 (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the 2000 Form 10-K) |
|
10 |
.19 |
|
Without Prejudice Resignation Agreement by and between Symbol
and Leonard Goldner, dated as of June 30, 2003
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.15 to the
2002 10-K) |
|
10 |
.20 |
|
Tolling Agreement by and between Symbol and Leonard Goldner,
dated as of June 9, 2004 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004) |
|
10 |
.21 |
|
Agreement by and between Symbol and Leonard Goldner, dated as of
October 13, 2004, to extend tolling period under the
Tolling Agreement, dated as of June 9, 2004 (Incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to Symbols Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2004) |
|
10 |
.22 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and William R. Nuti,
dated as of March 31, 2004 (Incorporated by referenced to
Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols Report on Form 8-K
filed on April 1, 2004) |
|
10 |
.23 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and William R. Nuti,
dated as of July 15, 2002 (Incorporated herein by reference
to Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2002) |
|
10 |
.24 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and Richard Bravman,
dated as of August 1, 2002 (Incorporated herein by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 to Symbols Quarterly Report
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002) |
|
10 |
.25 |
|
Letter Agreement by and between Symbol and Richard Bravman,
dated as of March 1, 2004 (Incorporated herein by reference
to Exhibit 10.19 of Symbols Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 the
2003 Form 10-K) |
|
10 |
.26 |
|
Employment Agreement by and between Symbol and Tomo Razmilovic,
dated as of February 14, 2002 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.12 to the 2001 Form 10-K) |
|
10 |
.27 |
|
Separation, Release and Non-Disclosure Agreement between Symbol
and Tomo Razmilovic, dated as of February 14, 2002
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to the 2001
Form 10-K) |
|
10 |
.28 |
|
Tolling Agreement by and between Symbol and Tomo Razmilovic,
dated as of May 6, 2003 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.20 to the 2002 Form 10-K) |
|
10 |
.29 |
|
Agreement by and between Symbol and Tomo Razmilovic, dated as of
March 18, 2004, to extend tolling period under the Tolling
Agreement, dated as of May 6, 2003 (Incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.27 to the Form S-1) |
|
10 |
.30 |
|
Executive Retirement Plan, as amended (Incorporated by reference
to Exhibit 10.2 to Symbols Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2002) |
|
10 |
.31 |
|
2002 Executive Stock Ownership and Option Retention Program,
dated as of December 16, 2002 (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.22 of the 2002 Form 10-K) |
|
10 |
.32 |
|
Summary of Symbol Technologies, Inc. Executive Bonus Plan
(Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 of the 1999
Form 10-K) |
|
10 |
.33 |
|
Credit Agreement, dated as of December 29, 2004, among
Symbol, the lenders identified therein, JPMorgan Chase Bank,
N.A., in its capacity as administrative and collateral agent,
Fleet National Bank, as syndication agent, and J.P. Morgan
Securities, Inc. and Banc of America Securities LLC, as co-lead
arrangers and joint bookrunners (Incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 4.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated
December 29, 2004) |
|
10 |
.34 |
|
Guarantee and Collateral Agreement, dated as of
December 29, 2004, among Symbol, the material subsidiaries
therein and JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., in its capacity as
collateral agent (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2
to the Current Report on Form 8-K dated
December 29, 2004) |
82
|
|
|
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
|
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
Letter, dated March 31, 2004, from Deloitte &
Touche LLP to the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 16.1 of
the Current Report on Form 8-K dated April 1, 2004) |
|
|
21 |
* |
|
Subsidiaries |
|
|
23 |
.1* |
|
Consent of Ernst & Young LLP |
|
|
23 |
.2* |
|
Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP |
|
|
31 |
.1* |
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer, pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
31 |
.2* |
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer, pursuant to
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
32 |
.1* |
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 |
|
32 |
.2* |
|
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 |
* Filed herewith.
83
SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries consolidated
financial statements and financial statement schedules
comprising Item 8 and Schedule II listed in the index
at Item 15 of Annual Report on Form 10-K to Securities
and Exchange Commission as of December 31, 2004 and 2003
and for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2004.
INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page | |
|
|
| |
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries consolidated
financial statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-1 |
|
|
|
|
F-3 |
|
|
|
|
F-4 |
|
|
|
|
F-5 |
|
|
|
|
F-6 |
|
|
|
|
F-8 |
|
|
|
|
F-9 |
|
Additional financial information
Schedule II Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
|
|
|
S-1 |
|
Schedules not listed above have been omitted because they are
either not applicable or the required information has been
provided elsewhere in the Consolidated Financial Statements or
notes thereto.
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Symbol
Technologies, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries (the
Company) as of December 31, 2004 and the
related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders equity, and cash flows for the year ended
December 31, 2004. Our audit also included the financial
statement schedule listed in the index at Item 15(a). These
financial statements and schedule are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements and schedule based on our
audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of Symbol Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries
at December 31, 2004, and the consolidated results of their
operations and their cash flows for the year ended
December 31, 2004, in conformity with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the
related financial statement schedule, when considered in
relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole,
presents fairly in all material respects the information set
forth therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
effectiveness of the Companys internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on
criteria established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission and our report dated March 1, 2005
expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
New York, New York
March 1, 2005
F-1
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Stockholders of Symbol
Technologies, Inc.
Holtsville, New York
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries (the
Company) as of December 31, 2003, and the
related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders equity, and cash flows for the years ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002. Our audits also included the
financial statement schedule listed in the index at
Item 15. These financial statements and financial statement
schedule are the responsibility of the Companys
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
financial statements and financial statement schedule based on
our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present
fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
December 31, 2003, and the results of their operations and
their cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2003 and
2002, in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America. Also, in our opinion,
such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation
to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole,
presents fairly in all material respects the information set
forth therein.
|
|
|
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP |
New York, New York
March 12, 2004
F-2
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Symbol Technologies,
Inc.
We have audited managements assessment, included in
Item 9A Controls and Procedures
Managements Report on Internal Control over Financial
Reporting that Symbol Technologies, Inc. and subsidiaries
(Symbol) maintained effective internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, based on
criteria established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). Symbols
management is responsible for maintaining effective internal
control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on managements
assessment and an opinion on the effectiveness of the
companys internal control over financial reporting based
on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, evaluating
managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
As indicated in Managements Report on Internal Control
over Financial Reporting, the Company has excluded from its
assessment of internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2004, the internal controls of Matrics, which
was acquired in September 2004. Matrics had net assets of
$44 million (excluding $194 million of goodwill
resulting from the purchase of Matrics) and an immaterial amount
of revenues and net income as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2004. Our audit of internal control over
financial reporting of the Company also did not include an
evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting of
Matrics.
In our opinion, managements assessment that Symbol
maintained effective internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2004 is fairly stated, in all material
respects, based on the COSO criteria. Also, in our opinion,
Symbol maintained, in all material respects, effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004,
based on the COSO criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheet of Symbol as of December 31,
2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders equity, and cash flows for the year ended
December 31, 2004 and our report dated March 1, 2005
expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
New York, New York
March 1, 2005
F-3
SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Amounts in thousands, except | |
|
|
per share data) | |
ASSETS |
Current Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
217,641 |
|
|
$ |
150,017 |
|
|
Accounts receivable, less allowance for doubtful accounts of
$9,385 and $13,946, respectively
|
|
|
113,658 |
|
|
|
152,377 |
|
|
Inventories, net
|
|
|
207,338 |
|
|
|
212,862 |
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
179,844 |
|
|
|
182,571 |
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
24,286 |
|
|
|
36,204 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
742,767 |
|
|
|
734,031 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
241,508 |
|
|
|
210,888 |
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
236,725 |
|
|
|
228,470 |
|
Investments in marketable securities
|
|
|
81,230 |
|
|
|
102,136 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
497,283 |
|
|
|
302,467 |
|
Intangible assets, net
|
|
|
45,404 |
|
|
|
33,729 |
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
51,370 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
34,082 |
|
|
|
34,797 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$ |
1,930,369 |
|
|
$ |
1,646,518 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
Current Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
$ |
414,915 |
|
|
$ |
490,666 |
|
|
Short term credit facility
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
18,072 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
43,692 |
|
|
|
34,615 |
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
20,132 |
|
|
|
5,468 |
|
|
Accrued restructuring expenses
|
|
|
9,971 |
|
|
|
5,240 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
606,782 |
|
|
|
536,223 |
|
Long-term debt, less current maturities
|
|
|
176,087 |
|
|
|
99,012 |
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
25,122 |
|
|
|
19,729 |
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
49,859 |
|
|
|
70,956 |
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, par value $1.00; authorized 10,000 shares,
none issued or outstanding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A Junior Participating preferred stock, par value
$1.00, authorized 500 shares, none issued or outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, par value $0.01; authorized 600,000 shares;
issued 272,069 shares and 256,897 shares, respectively
|
|
|
2,721 |
|
|
|
2,569 |
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
1,484,093 |
|
|
|
1,342,229 |
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive earnings, net
|
|
|
13,699 |
|
|
|
4,498 |
|
|
Deferred compensation
|
|
|
(15,642 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(112,565 |
) |
|
|
(189,669 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,372,306 |
|
|
|
1,159,627 |
|
LESS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Treasury stock at cost, 29,796 shares and
26,130 shares, respectively
|
|
|
(299,787 |
) |
|
|
(239,029 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
1,072,519 |
|
|
|
920,598 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity
|
|
$ |
1,930,369 |
|
|
$ |
1,646,518 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements.
F-4
SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Amounts in thousands, except per share data) | |
REVENUE:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product
|
|
$ |
1,433,671 |
|
|
$ |
1,223,853 |
|
|
$ |
1,103,070 |
|
|
Services
|
|
|
298,452 |
|
|
|
306,425 |
|
|
|
298,547 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,732,123 |
|
|
|
1,530,278 |
|
|
|
1,401,617 |
|
COST OF REVENUE:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product cost of revenue
|
|
|
709,967 |
|
|
|
635,103 |
|
|
|
693,980 |
|
|
Services cost of revenue
|
|
|
213,118 |
|
|
|
219,926 |
|
|
|
219,985 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
923,085 |
|
|
|
855,029 |
|
|
|
913,965 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GROSS PROFIT
|
|
|
809,038 |
|
|
|
675,249 |
|
|
|
487,652 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPERATING EXPENSES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Engineering
|
|
|
167,543 |
|
|
|
156,328 |
|
|
|
142,602 |
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
502,331 |
|
|
|
421,132 |
|
|
|
343,971 |
|
|
Stock based compensation expense/(recovery)(1)
|
|
|
2,234 |
|
|
|
17,087 |
|
|
|
(68,084 |
) |
|
(Recovery)/ provision for legal settlements
|
|
|
(21,400 |
) |
|
|
72,000 |
|
|
|
98,300 |
|
|
Restructuring and impairment charges
|
|
|
5,170 |
|
|
|
1,181 |
|
|
|
2,590 |
|
|
Write-off of acquired in-process research and development
|
|
|
12,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
668,678 |
|
|
|
667,728 |
|
|
|
519,379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EARNINGS/(LOSS) FROM OPERATIONS
|
|
|
140,360 |
|
|
|
7,521 |
|
|
|
(31,727 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OTHER (EXPENSE)/ INCOME:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
3,507 |
|
|
|
2,969 |
|
|
|
2,322 |
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(20,032 |
) |
|
|
(10,590 |
) |
|
|
(16,801 |
) |
|
Impairment of investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,550 |
) |
|
|
(32,200 |
) |
|
Other (expense)/ income, net
|
|
|
(66 |
) |
|
|
7,551 |
|
|
|
16,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16,591 |
) |
|
|
(3,620 |
) |
|
|
(30,003 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EARNINGS/(LOSS) BEFORE INCOME TAXES
|
|
|
123,769 |
|
|
|
3,901 |
|
|
|
(61,730 |
) |
Provision for/(benefit from) income taxes
|
|
|
41,922 |
|
|
|
606 |
|
|
|
(16,815 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings/(loss)
|
|
$ |
81,847 |
|
|
$ |
3,295 |
|
|
$ |
(44,915 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EARNINGS/(LOSS) PER SHARE:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
0.34 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
0.33 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
WEIGHTED AVERAGE NUMBER OF COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
242,469 |
|
|
|
230,710 |
|
|
|
229,593 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
246,166 |
|
|
|
236,449 |
|
|
|
229,593 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
If we had allocated stock based compensation expense/(recovery)
to each of the respective line items the allocation would have
been as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product cost of revenue
|
|
$ |
710 |
|
|
$ |
640 |
|
|
$ |
192 |
|
Services cost of revenue
|
|
|
335 |
|
|
|
1,002 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
Engineering
|
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
2,740 |
|
|
|
(2,888 |
) |
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
1,049 |
|
|
|
12,705 |
|
|
|
(65,595 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
2,234 |
|
|
$ |
17,087 |
|
|
$ |
(68,084 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-5
SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002, 2003 AND 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated | |
|
|
|
|
$0.01 Par Value | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Additional | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive | |
|
Comprehensive | |
|
|
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
|
Paid-In | |
|
Deferred |
|
Accumulated | |
|
Treasury | |
|
Earnings | |
|
Earnings | |
|
|
|
|
Issued | |
|
Amount | |
|
Capital | |
|
Compensation |
|
(Deficit) | |
|
Stock | |
|
(Loss) | |
|
(Loss) | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Amounts in thousands, except per share data) | |
|
BALANCE, JANUARY 1, 2002
|
|
|
253,313 |
|
|
$ |
2,533 |
|
|
$ |
1,373,432 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(138,827 |
) |
|
$ |
(222,104 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(15,919 |
) |
|
$ |
999,115 |
|
Comprehensive loss:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44,915 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(44,915 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(44,915 |
) |
Translation adjustments, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,663 |
|
|
|
6,663 |
|
|
|
6,663 |
|
Unrealized gain/(loss) on available for sale securities and
foreign currency cash flow hedges, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,840 |
) |
|
|
(3,840 |
) |
|
|
(3,840 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(42,092 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
3,099 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
17,579 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,610 |
|
Exercise of warrants
|
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
912 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
914 |
|
Stock based compensation expense/ (recovery) under variable
plan accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(68,084 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(68,084 |
) |
Treasury share activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26,092 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(26,092 |
) |
Re-issuance of treasury shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(754 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,720 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,966 |
|
Dividends paid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,598 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,598 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE, DECEMBER 31, 2002
|
|
|
256,589 |
|
|
|
2,566 |
|
|
|
1,323,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(188,340 |
) |
|
|
(236,476 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,096 |
) |
|
|
887,739 |
|
Comprehensive earnings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,295 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,295 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,295 |
|
Translation adjustments, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,009 |
|
|
|
17,009 |
|
|
|
17,009 |
|
Unrealized gain/(loss) on available for sale securities and
foreign currency cash flow hedges, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
585 |
|
|
|
585 |
|
|
|
585 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
20,889 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option abeyance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,539 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,539 |
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
308 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2,119 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,122 |
|
ESPP differential
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,137 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,137 |
|
Stock based compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
349 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
349 |
|
Treasury share activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,553 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,553 |
) |
Dividends paid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,624 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,624 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE,
DECEMBER 31, 2003
|
|
|
256,897 |
|
|
$ |
2,569 |
|
|
$ |
1,342,229 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(189,669 |
) |
|
$ |
(239,029 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,498 |
|
|
$ |
920,598 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-6
SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS
EQUITY (Continued)
FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2002, 2003 AND 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated | |
|
|
|
|
$0.01 Par Value | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other | |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Additional | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive | |
|
Comprehensive | |
|
|
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
|
Paid-In | |
|
Deferred | |
|
Accumulated | |
|
Treasury | |
|
Earnings | |
|
Earnings | |
|
|
|
|
Issued | |
|
Amount | |
|
Capital | |
|
Compensation | |
|
(Deficit) | |
|
Stock | |
|
(Loss) | |
|
(Loss) | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Amounts in thousands, except per share data) | |
|
BALANCE, DECEMBER 31, 2003
|
|
|
256,897 |
|
|
$ |
2,569 |
|
|
$ |
1,342,229 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(189,669 |
) |
|
$ |
(239,029 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4,498 |
|
|
$ |
920,598 |
|
Comprehensive earnings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,847 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
81,847 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,847 |
|
Translation adjustments, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,446 |
|
|
|
11,446 |
|
|
|
11,446 |
|
Unrealized gain/(loss) on available for sale securities and
foreign currency cash flow hedges, net of tax
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,245 |
) |
|
|
(2,245 |
) |
|
|
(2,245 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive earnings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
91,048 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock option abeyance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,430 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,430 |
|
Exercise of stock options
|
|
|
13,273 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
114,210 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
114,343 |
|
Class action lawsuit settlement in shares
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
9,619 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,625 |
|
ESPP differential
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,258 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,258 |
) |
Treasury share activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(68,006 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(68,006 |
) |
Re-issuance of treasury shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,248 |
|
Deferred stock compensation
|
|
|
1,312 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
17,863 |
|
|
|
(15,642 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,234 |
|
Dividends paid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,743 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,743 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE, DECEMBER 31, 2004
|
|
|
272,069 |
|
|
$ |
2,721 |
|
|
$ |
1,484,093 |
|
|
$ |
(15,642 |
) |
|
$ |
(112,565 |
) |
|
$ |
(299,787 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
13,699 |
|
|
$ |
1,072,519 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-7
SYMBOL TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(Amounts in thousands) | |
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earnings/(loss)
|
|
$ |
81,847 |
|
|
$ |
3,295 |
|
|
$ |
(44,915 |
) |
ADJUSTMENTS TO RECONCILE NET EARNINGS/ (LOSS) TO NET CASH
PROVIDED BY OPERATING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
54,248 |
|
|
|
52,949 |
|
|
|
56,460 |
|
Other amortization
|
|
|
23,549 |
|
|
|
15,838 |
|
|
|
12,877 |
|
Provision for losses on accounts receivable
|
|
|
3,514 |
|
|
|
7,564 |
|
|
|
15,975 |
|
Provision for inventory writedown
|
|
|
16,189 |
|
|
|
20,132 |
|
|
|
26,339 |
|
(Recovery) provision for legal settlements
|
|
|
(21,400 |
) |
|
|
72,000 |
|
|
|
98,300 |
|
Write-off of acquired in-process research and development
|
|
|
12,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non cash restructuring, asset impairment and other charges
|
|
|
15,964 |
|
|
|
4,433 |
|
|
|
46,774 |
|
Non cash stock based compensation expense/(recovery)
|
|
|
4,468 |
|
|
|
17,087 |
|
|
|
(65,092 |
) |
Loss on sale of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
3,803 |
|
|
|
2,751 |
|
|
|
3,031 |
|
Unrealized holding loss/(gain) on marketable securities
|
|
|
20,758 |
|
|
|
(46,549 |
) |
|
|
17,090 |
|
(Decrease)/increase in fair value of derivative
|
|
|
(19,622 |
) |
|
|
39,311 |
|
|
|
(37,787 |
) |
Deferred income taxes provision (benefit)
|
|
|
15,627 |
|
|
|
(6,232 |
) |
|
|
(22,964 |
) |
Tax benefit on exercise of stock options and warrants
|
|
|
25,665 |
|
|
|
439 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
CHANGES IN OPERATING ASSETS AND LIABILITIES, NET OF EFFECTS OF
ACQUISITIONS AND DIVESTITURES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
32,546 |
|
|
|
3,588 |
|
|
|
(25,572 |
) |
Inventories
|
|
|
(5,867 |
) |
|
|
33,522 |
|
|
|
51,320 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
(573 |
) |
|
|
(1,239 |
) |
|
|
5,835 |
|
Net proceeds (payments) from lease securitizations
|
|
|
6,695 |
|
|
|
9,395 |
|
|
|
(3,930 |
) |
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
|
|
|
(59,268 |
) |
|
|
(7,447 |
) |
|
|
54,471 |
|
Accrued restructuring expenses
|
|
|
(7,323 |
) |
|
|
(1,708 |
) |
|
|
(6,692 |
) |
Other liabilities and deferred revenue
|
|
|
20,899 |
|
|
|
14,636 |
|
|
|
(4,189 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
224,519 |
|
|
|
233,765 |
|
|
|
177,470 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of companies purchased, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
(239,329 |
) |
|
|
(14,993 |
) |
|
|
(10,796 |
) |
Restricted cash
|
|
|
(51,012 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
3,550 |
|
|
|
1,381 |
|
|
|
4,243 |
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(91,574 |
) |
|
|
(60,573 |
) |
|
|
(34,703 |
) |
Investments in intangible and other assets
|
|
|
(3,479 |
) |
|
|
(5,083 |
) |
|
|
(2,376 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(381,844 |
) |
|
|
(79,268 |
) |
|
|
(43,632 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of notes payable and long-term debt
|
|
|
453,505 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of notes payable and long-term debt
|
|
|
(253,714 |
) |
|
|
(86,782 |
) |
|
|
(51,837 |
) |
Repurchase of convertible notes and debentures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(84,432 |
) |
Proceeds from exercise of stock options, warrants and employee
stock purchase plan
|
|
|
47,212 |
|
|
|
4,178 |
|
|
|
15,074 |
|
Acquisition of treasury shares
|
|
|
(26,590 |
) |
|
|
(5,110 |
) |
|
|
(8,772 |
) |
Dividends paid
|
|
|
(4,743 |
) |
|
|
(4,624 |
) |
|
|
(4,598 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by/(used in) financing activities
|
|
|
215,670 |
|
|
|
(92,338 |
) |
|
|
(134,565 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effects of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
9,279 |
|
|
|
11,737 |
|
|
|
6,483 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
67,624 |
|
|
|
73,896 |
|
|
|
5,756 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year
|
|
|
150,017 |
|
|
|
76,121 |
|
|
|
70,365 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year
|
|
$ |
217,641 |
|
|
$ |
150,017 |
|
|
$ |
76,121 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURES OF CASH FLOW INFORMATION:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH PAID (RECEIVED) DURING THE YEAR FOR:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
|
|
$ |
26,867 |
|
|
$ |
11,132 |
|
|
$ |
15,598 |
|
Income taxes
|
|
$ |
15,006 |
|
|
$ |
4,698 |
|
|
$ |
(11,513 |
) |
See notes to consolidated financial statements
F-8
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial statements as of
December 31, 2004 and 2003 and for the
years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002
(amounts in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
1. |
Summary of significant accounting policies |
a. Description of business and principles of consolidation
Symbol Technologies, Inc., The Enterprise Mobility
Company, and subsidiaries deliver products and solutions
that capture, move and manage information in real time to and
from the point of business activity. Symbol enterprise mobility
solutions integrate advanced data capture products, mobile
computing platforms, wireless infrastructure, mobility software
and services programs under the Symbol Enterprise Mobility
Services brand. The Consolidated Financial Statements include
the accounts of Symbol Technologies, Inc. and its majority-owned
and controlled subsidiaries. All significant intercompany
transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.
References herein to Symbol, Company,
we, us, or our refer to
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and its subsidiaries unless the
context specifically states or implies otherwise.
b. Cash and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include highly liquid investments with
original maturities of three months or less and consist
primarily of money market funds and time deposits at
December 31, 2004 and 2003. Such investments are stated at
cost, which approximates market value and were $98,005 and
$63,021 at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. These
investments are not subject to significant market risk.
Restricted cash at December 31, 2004 of $51,370 represents
two deposits, plus interest. One amount of $50,358 at
December 31, 2004 collateralizes a bond serving as security
for the trial court judgment against Telxon and Symbol for
Telxon vs. SmartMedia of Delaware, Inc. pending appeal. The cash
is held in a trust and is restricted as to withdrawal or use,
and is currently invested in a short-term certificate of deposit
(See note 14d). The second amount at December 31, 2004
of $1,012 is an interest-bearing letter of credit pledged as a
supplier bond. Interest income earned from these investments are
recognized by the Company.
c. Allowance for doubtful accounts
Our allowance for doubtful accounts is based on our assessment
of the collectibility of specific customer accounts and an
assessment of international, political and economic risks, as
well as the aging of the accounts receivable.
d. Inventories
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost (determined on a
first-in, first-out basis) or market. The Company evaluates its
inventories to determine excess or slow moving products based on
quantities on hand, current orders and expected future demand.
For those items in which the Company believes it has an excess
supply or for items that are obsolete, the Company estimates the
net amount that the Company expects to realize from the sale of
such products.
F-9
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
e. Property, plant and equipment
Property, plant and equipment are recorded at cost. Depreciation
and amortization is provided on a straight-line basis over the
following estimated useful lives:
|
|
|
|
|
Buildings and improvements
|
|
|
15 to 40 years |
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
3 to 7 years |
|
Furniture, fixtures and office equipment
|
|
|
3 to 10 years |
|
Computer hardware and software
|
|
|
3 to 7 years |
|
Leasehold improvements (limited to terms of the leases)
|
|
|
2 to 10 years |
|
Transportation
|
|
|
5 years |
|
f. Goodwill and intangible assets
In June 2001, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards (SFAS) No. 142, Goodwill and
Other Intangible Assets. Under SFAS No. 142,
goodwill and indefinite life intangible assets acquired in a
business combination will no longer be amortized but rather be
subject to an assessment for impairment at least annually using
a prescribed fair-value-based test. We, therefore, stopped
amortizing goodwill and adopted the provisions of this Statement
effective January 1, 2002. We performed an impairment
analysis in 2004, 2003 and 2002 as required by
SFAS No. 142, and concluded that the carrying amount
of goodwill was not impaired (see Note 6).
Patents and trademarks, including costs incurred in connection
with the protection of patents, are amortized using the
straight-line method over six years. The Company does not have
any indefinite-life intangible assets. Finite-life intangible
assets are evaluated whenever events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying value of the asset may be impaired.
An asset is impaired if its estimated undiscounted cash flow to
be produced by such asset is less than the asset carrying value.
An impairment loss is recognized for an intangible asset to the
extent that the assets carrying value exceeds its fair
value.
g. Research and development including software development
costs
Research and development costs are charged to expense as
incurred and are included as a component of engineering costs.
Such costs, including charges for overhead, were $125,100,
$108,800 and $72,845 for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002, respectively. Software development costs are
expensed as incurred until a working model has been established.
After a working model is established, any additional costs would
be capitalized in accordance with SFAS No. 86,
Accounting for the Cost of Computer Software to Be Sold,
Leased or Otherwise Marketed. To date, no software
development costs have been capitalized, as such costs have not
been significant and we believe our current process for
developing this software is essentially completed concurrently
with the establishment of a working model.
h. Investments
All marketable equity securities are classified as either
available-for-sale or trading under
SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments
in Debt and Equity Securities. Unrealized gains and
losses, net of tax, related to available-for-sale securities are
included in accumulated other comprehensive earnings or loss
within stockholders equity. Unrealized gains and losses on
trading securities, realized gains and losses on trading and
available for sale securities and unrealized other than
temporary losses on available for sale securities are reflected
in other income in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. We
evaluate the carrying value of our investments in marketable
equity securities considered available-for-sale as required
under the provisions of SFAS No. 115.
F-10
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
|
|
|
Non-marketable securities |
We account for non-marketable investments using the equity
method of accounting if the investment gives the Company the
ability to exercise significant influence, but not control, over
an investee. Significant influence generally exists if the
Company has an ownership interest representing between 20% and
50% of the voting stock of the investee. Under the equity method
of accounting, investments are stated at initial cost and are
adjusted for subsequent additional investments and the
Companys proportionate share of income or losses and
distributions. The Company records its share of the
investees earnings or losses in other income
(expense) in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Where the Company is unable to exercise significant influence
over the investee, investments are accounted for under the cost
method. Under the cost method, investments are carried at cost
and adjusted only for the other-than-temporary declines in fair
value or additional investments.
i. Long-lived assets
We review our long-lived assets, other than goodwill, including
property, plant and equipment and finite-lived intangible
assets, for impairment whenever events or circumstances indicate
that their carrying amounts may not be recoverable. We
determined recoverability of the assets by comparing the
carrying amount of the asset to net future undiscounted cash
flows that the asset was expected to generate. If such cash
flows do not equal or exceed the carrying value, we will
recognize an impairment equal to the amount by which the
carrying amount exceeded the discounted value of expected cash
flows (fair value) of the asset.
j. Securitization transactions
We periodically securitize certain of our lease receivables
which have unguaranteed residual values. Our retained interest
in these securitized lease receivables is classified as a
component of other assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
These retained interests are initially recorded at their
allocated carrying amounts based on the relative fair value of
assets sold and retained. Retained interests, other than
unguaranteed residuals, are reviewed and adjusted to fair value
on a monthly basis as trading securities. Since quoted market
prices are generally not available, we estimate fair value of
these retained interests by determining the present value of
future expected cash flows using modeling techniques that
incorporate our best estimates of key assumptions, which include
credit losses, prepayment speed and discount rates commensurate
with the risks involved.
k. Revenue recognition
We sell our products and systems to end users for their own
consumption as well as to value-added resellers, distributors
and original equipment manufacturers (OEMs or channel partners).
Channel partners may provide a service or add componentry in
order to resell our product to end users. Revenue from the
direct sale of our products and systems to end users and OEMs is
recognized when products are shipped or services are rendered,
the title and risk of loss has passed to the customer, the sales
price is fixed or determinable and collectibility is reasonably
assured. The recognition of revenues related to sales of our
products or systems to our value-added resellers is dependent
upon the resellers ability to pay for the product without
reselling it to the end user. Sales to resellers that are
financially sound are recognized when products are shipped to
the resellers, the title and risk of loss has passed to the
reseller, the sales price is fixed or determinable and
collectibility is reasonably assured. Sales to resellers that
lack economic substance or cannot pay for our products without
reselling them to their customers are recognized when the
revenue is billed and collected. Revenue on sales to
distributors is recognized when our products and systems are
sold by the distributor to its customer. Rebates are recorded as
a reduction of product revenues when earned by our customers.
Outbound shipping charges to our customers are included in our
product sales. Rebates for the years ended December 31,
2004, and 2003 were approximately $33,100, and $23,000,
respectively. Included in accounts payable and accrued expenses
as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 was $18,169 and $13,161
related to rebates.
F-11
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
The Services business is comprised of three integrated elements:
mobility services, professional services and customer services.
The mobility and professional services offerings include design,
consulting and implementation of Symbol products and solutions.
These services are generally billed on a fixed fee basis and
revenue is recognized when the services are completed due to the
short term nature of such services.
Customer services offerings, includes time and material
services, spare part sales and maintenance service contracts.
Time and material services are typically ordered by customers
for equipment which is not under a maintenance service contract
and which is in need of repair. These arrangements provide
payment to Symbol based on direct labor hours at fixed rates
plus the cost of materials. Revenue is recognized once the
product has been repaired and shipped to the customer, when
there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, the price is
fixed or determinable and collectibility is reasonably assured.
Revenue from sales that lack evidence of an arrangement are
recognized when services are rendered and are billed and
collected.
Spare part sales encompasses the sale of spare parts/
accessories to third parties. Revenue is recognized when parts
and accessory orders are fulfilled and shipped to the customer,
when there is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, the price
is fixed or determinable and collectibility is reasonably
assured. Revenue from sales that lack evidence of an arrangement
are recognized when services are rendered and are billed and
collected.
Maintenance service contract revenues are recognized when there
is persuasive evidence of an arrangement, the services are
rendered, the price is fixed or determinable and collectibility
is reasonably assured, generally over the contract term. Revenue
from these contracts that lack evidence of an arrangement are
recognized when billed and collected and services are rendered.
When a sale involves multiple elements, such as sales of
products that include services, the entire revenue from the
arrangement is allocated to each respective element based on its
relative fair value and is recognized when the revenue
recognition criteria for each element are met. Fair value for
each element is established based on the sales price charged by
us when the same element is sold separately. In addition,
installation services are not considered by the Company to be a
separate unit of accounting and accordingly, the Company defers
revenue associated with its product offerings until the
installation is completed and customer acceptance is obtained.
We record a provision for estimated future product returns based
on our historical experience of similar product returns from our
customers.
l. Guarantees and product warranties
FASB Interpretation No. 45, Guarantors
Accounting and Disclosure Requirements for Guarantees, Including
Indirect Guarantees of Indebtedness of Others
(FIN 45), requires that upon issuance of a
guarantee, the guarantor must disclosure and recognize a
liability for the fair value of the obligation it assumes under
that guarantee. The disclosure requirements of FIN 45 are
applicable to the Companys product warranty liability.
We provide standard warranty coverage for most of our products
for a period of one year from the date of shipment. We record a
liability for estimated warranty claims based on historical
claims, product failure rates and other factors. Management
reviews these estimates on a regular basis and adjusts the
warranty reserves as actual experience differs from historical
estimates or other information becomes available. This warranty
liability primarily includes the anticipated cost of materials,
labor and shipping necessary to repair and service the equipment.
F-12
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
The following table illustrates the changes in our warranty
reserves for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002, respectively:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Balance, beginning of year
|
|
$ |
20,828 |
|
|
$ |
15,034 |
|
|
$ |
12,556 |
|
Charges to expense cost of revenue
|
|
|
27,225 |
|
|
|
34,559 |
|
|
|
39,249 |
|
Revisions in estimates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,800 |
|
|
|
|
|
Utilization/payment
|
|
|
(27,097 |
) |
|
|
(31,565 |
) |
|
|
(36,771 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, end of year
|
|
$ |
20,956 |
|
|
$ |
20,828 |
|
|
$ |
15,034 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
m. Income taxes
Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are recognized for
the expected future tax consequences of events that have been
included in our consolidated financial statements or tax
returns. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities
are determined based on the differences between the financial
accounting and tax bases of assets and liabilities using enacted
tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are
expected to reverse. We evaluate the likelihood of recovering
our deferred tax assets and the adequacy of the related
valuation allowance by estimating sources of taxable income and
the impact of tax planning strategies. Realization of our
deferred tax assets is dependent on our ability to generate
sufficient future taxable income.
Research, experimental and other tax credits are accounted for
by the flow-through method. The cumulative amount of
undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries at
December 31, 2004 approximates $95,000. We do not provide
deferred taxes on undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries
since these earnings are considered indefinitely reinvested. If
it was intended that these earnings were not reinvested, the
Company does not expect that, over time, recording deferred
taxes would result in significant incremental taxes since the
majority of foreign earnings were subject to income tax at rates
approximating the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate.
On October 22, 2004 the President signed the American Jobs
Creation Act of 2004 (AJCA). The AJCA creates a
temporary incentive for U.S. corporations to repatriate
accumulated income earned abroad by providing an 85 percent
dividends received deduction for certain dividends from
controlled foreign corporations. The deduction is subject to a
number of limitations and, as of today, uncertainty remains as
to how to interpret numerous provisions of the AJCA. As such, we
are not yet in a position to decide on whether, and to what
extent, we might repatriate foreign earnings that have not yet
been remitted to the U.S. Based on analysis to date, we
expect to repatriate up to $95,000 in accordance with this
temporary incentive. The resulting tax impact of repatriation
cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. We expect to
finalize our assessment of this new provision by
September 30, 2005.
n. Earnings/(loss) per share
Basic earnings/(loss) per share are based on the weighted
average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the
period. Diluted earnings per share amounts are based on the
weighted average number of common and potentially dilutive
common shares (options, warrants and restricted shares)
outstanding during the period computed in accordance with the
treasury stock method.
o. Stock-based compensation
As permitted by the provisions of SFAS No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, we apply
the intrinsic value method as described in Accounting Principles
Board Opinion No. 25 and related interpretations in
accounting for our employee stock based compensation plans.
Generally, no compensation cost has been recognized for the
fixed portion of our plans. However, as described in
Note 15, during 2004 and 2003, compensation expense has
been recognized related to options of certain current and former
associates
F-13
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
and stock purchases under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan
(ESPP). Also during 2002, compensation expense has
been recognized for certain options granted through
July 30, 2002.
The following table illustrates the effect on net
earnings/(loss) per share if we had applied the fair value
recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 to stock-based
employee compensation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Net earnings/(loss) as reported
|
|
$ |
81,847 |
|
|
$ |
3,295 |
|
|
$ |
(44,915 |
) |
Stock based employee compensation expense/(recovery) included in
reported net earnings/ (loss), net of related tax effects
|
|
|
1,605 |
|
|
|
6,702 |
|
|
|
(41,872 |
) |
Less total stock based employee compensation expense determined
under fair value based method for all awards, net of related tax
effects
|
|
|
(21,407 |
) |
|
|
(20,510 |
) |
|
|
(21,034 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net earnings/(loss)
|
|
$ |
62,045 |
|
|
$ |
(10,513 |
) |
|
$ |
(107,821 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings/(loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic as reported
|
|
$ |
0.34 |
|
|
$ |
0.01 |
|
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
Diluted as reported
|
|
|
0.33 |
|
|
|
0.01 |
|
|
|
(0.20 |
) |
Basic pro forma
|
|
|
0.26 |
|
|
|
(0.05 |
) |
|
|
(0.47 |
) |
Diluted pro forma
|
|
$ |
0.25 |
|
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.47 |
) |
The weighted average fair value of options granted during 2004,
2003, and 2002 was $7.91, $7.02, and $4.53 respectively. In
determining the fair value of options and stock purchase
warrants granted for purposes of calculating the pro forma
results disclosed above, we used the Black-Scholes option
pricing model and assumed the following: a risk free interest
rate of 2.8 percent for 2004 and 2003, 4.0 percent for
2002 an expected option life of 4.5, 4.7 and 4.7 years for
2004, 2003 and 2002 respectively, an expected volatility of
61 percent for 2004 and 2003 and 59 percent for 2002
and a dividend yield of 0.14 percent per year. As required
by SFAS No. 123, the impact of outstanding non-vested
stock options granted prior to 1995 has been excluded from the
pro forma calculation.
p. Derivative instruments, foreign currency and hedging
activities
Assets and liabilities of foreign subsidiaries where the local
currency is the functional currency are translated at year-end
exchange rates. Changes arising from translation are recorded in
the accumulated other comprehensive earnings/(loss) component of
stockholders equity. Results of operations are translated
using the average exchange rates prevailing throughout the year.
Gains and losses from foreign currency transactions are included
in the Consolidated Statements of Operations for the periods
presented and are not material.
We follow the provisions of SFAS No. 133,
Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging
Activities, as amended. SFAS No. 133 requires
the recognition of all derivative instruments as either assets
or liabilities in the consolidated balance sheet measured at
fair value. Changes in fair value are recognized immediately in
earnings unless the derivative qualifies as a cash flow hedge.
For derivatives qualifying as cash flow hedges, the effective
portion of changes in fair value of the derivative instrument is
recorded as a component of other comprehensive earnings/(loss)
and is reclassified to earnings in the same period during which
the hedged transaction affects earnings. Any ineffective portion
(representing the remaining gain or loss on the derivative
instrument in excess of the cumulative change in the present
value of future cash flows of the hedged transaction) is
recognized in earnings as it occurs. For fair value hedges,
changes in fair value of the derivative, as well as the
offsetting changes in fair value of the hedged item, are
recognized in earnings each period.
F-14
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
We formally designate and document each derivative financial
instrument as a hedge of a specific underlying exposure as well
as the risk management objectives and strategies for entering
into the hedge transaction upon inception. We also assess
whether the derivative financial instrument is effective in
offsetting changes in the fair value or cash flows of the hedged
item. We did not recognize any gain or loss related to hedge
ineffectiveness in 2004, 2003 or 2002.
We do not use derivative financial instruments for trading
purposes. All of our hedges qualify for either cash flow or fair
value hedge accounting, other than a portion of our embedded
equity collar contained in the private Mandatorily Exchangeable
Contract for Shared Appreciation Income Linked Securities
(SAILS) arrangement (See Note 5) as the related
Cisco shares have been designated as trading securities.
However, the aforementioned portion of the embedded equity
collar and the related Cisco shares result in an economic hedge
as it effectively manages a large portion of the fluctuation in
the Cisco shares designated as trading securities. Accordingly,
any change in fair value of this embedded equity collar between
reporting dates is recognized through operations in other
income. In addition, the change in market value of Cisco shares,
designated as trading securities, between reporting dates is
recognized through operations in other income. As of
April 1, 2003, we designated a portion of the embedded
equity collar as a fair value hedge of our Cisco shares
designated as available-for-sale securities.
We also utilize derivative financial instruments to hedge the
risk exposures associated with foreign currency fluctuations for
payments denominated in foreign currencies from our
international subsidiaries. These derivative instruments are
designated as either fair value or cash flow hedges, depending
on the exposure being hedged, and have maturities of less than
one year. Gains and losses on these derivative financial
instruments and the offsetting losses and gains on hedged
transactions are reflected in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations as a component of cost of revenue. Such (losses) and
gains were $(1,736), $315, and $(1,666) for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. We do not
use these derivative financial instruments for trading purposes.
As of December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively, we had
$70,632 and $40,673 in notional amounts of forward exchange
contracts outstanding. The forward exchange contracts generally
have maturities that do not exceed 12 months and require us
to exchange foreign currencies for U.S. dollars at maturity
at rates agreed to at inception of the contracts. These
contracts are primarily denominated in British pounds, Euros,
Australian dollars, Canadian dollars and Japanese yen and have
been marked to market each year with the resulting gains and
losses included in the Consolidated Statement of Operations. The
fair value of these forward exchange contracts was $(3,629) and
$107 as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 respectively, which
was recorded in current liabilities and current assets,
respectively.
q. Segment information
We follow the provisions of SFAS No. 131,
Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related
Information, which establishes standards for reporting
information about operating segments. SFAS No. 131
requires disclosures about products and services, geographic
areas and major customers. (See Note 18)
r. Use of estimates
The preparation of financial statements requires us to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the
reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting
period. Actual results could materially differ from those
estimates. Our most significant use of estimates relates to the
determination of provisions for uncollectible accounts
receivable, excess and obsolete inventory, recoverability of
goodwill, warranty costs, product return costs, tax valuation
allowances and litigation contingencies.
F-15
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
s. Fair value of financial instruments
The fair value of the Companys financial instruments,
including cash and cash equivalents, accounts payable and
accrued expenses, approximate cost because of their short
maturities. The fair value of investments in marketable
securities is determined using quoted market prices.
t. Concentrations of credit risk
Financial instruments that potentially subject us to
concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash and cash
equivalents, investments in marketable securities and accounts
receivable.
Credit is extended to customers based on an evaluation of their
financial condition and collateral is not required. We perform
ongoing credit assessments of our customers and maintain an
allowance for doubtful accounts.
Revenues from one of our distribution partners, in our product
division, represents approximately 16%, 13% and 10% of our
consolidated revenue for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002, respectively. Accounts receivable from one of our
customers represented approximately 11% of our consolidated
accounts receivable at December 31, 2004.
u. Recently issued accounting pronouncements
On December 16, 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards
Board (FASB) issued FASB Statement No. 123 (revised
2004), Share-Based Payment (Statement 123(R)),
which is a revision of FASB Statement No. 123,
Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation.
Statement 123(R) supersedes APB Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and amends FASB
Statement No. 95, Statement of Cash Flows.
Generally, the approach in Statement 123(R) is similar to
the approach described in Statement 123. However,
Statement 123(R) requires all share-based payments to
employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be
recognized in the income statement based on their fair values.
Statement 123(R) must be adopted no later than July 1,
2005. Early adoption will be permitted in periods in which
financial statements have not yet been issued. We expect to
adopt Statement 123(R) on July 1, 2005.
Statement 123(R) permits public companies to adopt its
requirements using one of two methods:
|
|
|
1. A modified prospective method in which
compensation cost is recognized beginning with the effective
date (a) based on the requirements of Statement 123(R)
for all share-based payments granted after the effective date
and (b) based on the requirements of Statement 123(R)
for all awards granted to employees prior to the effective date
of Statement 123(R) that remain unvested on the effective
date. |
|
|
2. A modified retrospective method which
includes the requirements of the modified prospective method
described above, but also permits entities to restate based on
the amounts previously recognized under Statement 123(R)
for purposes of pro forma disclosures either (a) all prior
periods presented or (b) prior interim periods of the year
of adoption. |
We plan to adopt Statement 123(R) using the
modified-prospective method.
As permitted by Statement 123(R), we currently account for
share-based payments to employees using Opinion 25s
intrinsic value method and, as such, generally recognizes no
compensation cost for employee stock options. Accordingly, the
adoption of Statement 123(R)s fair value method will
have a significant impact on our result of operations, although
it will have no impact on our overall financial position. The
impact of adoption of Statement 123(R) cannot be predicted
at this time because it will depend on levels of share-based
payments granted in the future. However, had we adopted
Statement 123(R) in prior periods, the impact of that
standard would have approximated the impact of
Statement 123(R) as described in the disclosure of pro
forma net income and earnings per share shown in letter o.
above. Statement 123(R) also requires the benefits of tax
deductions in excess of recognized compensation cost to be
reported as a financing cash flow, rather than as an operating
cash flow as required under current literature. This requirement
will
F-16
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
reduce net operating cash flows and increase net financing cash
flows in periods after adoption. While we cannot estimate what
those amounts will be in the future (because they depend on,
among other things, when employees exercise stock options), the
amount of operating cash flows recognized in prior periods for
such tax deductions were $25,665, $439, and $139 in 2004, 2003
and 2002, respectively.
Based on the release of Statement 123(R), we plan on
amending our Employee Stock Purchase Program (ESPP)
to reduce the discount of the price of the shares purchased by
employees in the ESPP from its current discount of 15% to a
discount of 5% and we will also eliminate the look-back period
currently utilized to determine the price of the shares
purchased. These changes will allow the ESPP to continue to be
non compensatory, which will result in no compensation expense
to be recorded by us in our statement of operations when we
implement Statement 123(R).
a. Brazil acquisition
During the second quarter of 2002, we entered into an agreement
with the owners of Seal Sistemas e Technologia Da Informacao
Ltda. (Seal), a Brazilian corporation that had
operated as a distributor and integrator of our products since
1987. The agreement resulted in the termination of distribution
rights for Seal and the creation of a majority-owned subsidiary
of the Company that would serve as the Brazilian distributor and
customer service entity (Symbol Brazil). In
accordance with the terms of the agreement, the owners of Seal
acquired a 49 percent ownership interest in Symbol Brazil.
Terms of the agreement included payments to the minority
shareholders that range from a minimum of $9,550 to a maximum of
$14,800 contingent upon the attainment of certain annual net
revenue levels of Symbol Brazil. In the event that none of the
specified revenue levels are attained, the minimum earnout
payment is payable no later than March 31, 2009. With each
earnout payment, we will obtain a portion of Symbol
Brazils shares owned by the minority shareholders such
that we will ultimately own 100 percent of Symbol Brazil no
later than March 31, 2009. We loaned an entity affiliated
with the minority shareholders $5,000 at the time of the
agreement, which was due on the date the first earnout payment
is triggered. The present value of net future minimum earnout
payments of $4,550 amounted to $1,992 and was recorded as part
of the purchase price resulting in a total purchase price of
$6,992. Any additional earnout payments will be accounted for as
additional purchase price and recorded as goodwill.
Management allocated the purchase price and considered a number
of factors and, as a result of such procedures, the total
purchase price has been classified as goodwill. We have not
shown the pro-forma effects of this acquisition as the results
of operations of the acquired company prior to our acquisition
was immaterial in relation to our Consolidated Financial
Statements.
On January 10, 2004, the parties amended this transaction,
whereby Symbol Technologies Holdings do Brasil Ltda., a wholly
owned subsidiary of the Company, purchased an additional 34%
ownership interest of Symbol Brazil owned by two principals of
Seal. The Company paid $4,050 and also forgave the pre-existing
$5,000 loan and related accrued interest of $92 that had been
made to an entity affiliated with the principals of Seal.
Accordingly, the Company and Symbol Technologies Holdings do
Brasil Ltda. now own 85% of the capital of Symbol Brazil. As a
result of the transaction, the Company satisfied the obligation
related to the minimum earnout requirement of approximately
$2,337 at January 10, 2004 and recorded the excess purchase
price of approximately $1,805 as goodwill. Under the terms of
the relevant agreements, Symbol Brazil was reorganized into a
corporation and it will eventually become a wholly owned
subsidiary of the Company.
The minority interest in earnings of operations of Symbol Brazil
was immaterial for the years ended December 31, 2004 and
2003 and the period post acquisition through December 31,
2002, respectively.
b. Covigo acquisition
F-17
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
In July 2003, we purchased all of the outstanding common and
preferred shares of Covigo, Inc. (Covigo), a creator
of software used in developing and deploying mobile computing
applications, for approximately $12,500. The acquisition is
expected to enhance and expand the range of such applications
that Symbol offers. The acquisition was accounted for as a
purchase and accordingly, Covigos operating results since
the acquisition date have been included in Symbols
Consolidated Financial Statements. Covigo became part of the
Companys Product segment. The assets acquired and
liabilities assumed have been recorded at their estimated fair
values.
The following table summarizes the allocation of the purchase
price to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed at the date
of acquisition
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
$ |
137 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
60 |
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
7,665 |
|
Purchased software (five-year life)
|
|
|
3,200 |
|
Customer relationship (five-year life)
|
|
|
200 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
4,709 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
18 |
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
(3,480 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
12,509 |
|
|
|
|
|
We have not shown the pro forma effects of this acquisition as
the results of operations of the acquired company prior to our
acquisition was immaterial in relation to our consolidated
financial statements.
c. Imageware Technologies, Inc.
In January 2003, we completed the purchase of certain software
and related assets from Imageware Technologies, Inc. for an
initial purchase price of $750. On March 16, 2004, we
terminated the agreement with Imageware and paid $375 in
termination fees associated with ending the Imageware agreement
and accordingly, have written off this investment.
d. Cuesol, Inc.
In January 2003, we purchased 216 shares of voting common
stock in Cuesol, Inc. (Cuesol) for $1,000. Cuesol
creates wireless, customer-interactive solutions that empower
retailers to communicate with customers on an individual basis.
Since our investment is less than 20 percent and we lack
the ability to exercise significant influence over Cuesol, we
account for this investment using the cost method.
e. Trio Security, Inc.
In June 2004, we purchased all of the issued and outstanding
capital stock of Trio Security, Inc. (Trio), a
privately held designer and developer of next generation
security solutions for enterprise networks to enable mobile
applications for handheld devices, for $600, excluding $60 of
transaction costs. Pursuant to the acquisition agreement, $500
of the purchase price was paid in June 2004 and $100 was paid in
July 2004. The acquisition is expected to enable, enhance and
expand the range of applications for which Symbol products can
be used. The acquisition was accounted for as a purchase and
accordingly, Trios operating results since the acquisition
date have been included in Symbols financial statements.
Trio became part of the Companys Product segment. The
assets acquired and liabilities assumed have been recorded at
their estimated fair values. All of the purchase price has been
allocated to goodwill.
We have not shown the pro forma effects of this acquisition as
the results of operations of the acquired company prior to our
acquisition was immaterial in relation to our consolidated
financial statements.
F-18
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
f. Matrics, Inc.
On September 9, 2004, we consummated the acquisition of
privately held Matrics, Inc. (Matrics). Based in
Rockville, Maryland, Matrics is a leader in developing
Electronic Product Code (EPC)-compliant Radio
Frequency Identification (RFID) systems. RFID is a
next generation data capture technology that utilizes small tags
that emit radio signals. Attaching a tag to products or assets
allows for remote reading of information relevant to the asset.
While similar to a bar code, RFID does not require physical
contact between the reader and the tag, or even a line of sight,
it provides the ability to capture more data more efficiently
and is beneficial in areas such as supply chain management,
asset tracking and security. We believe the acquisition of
Matrics is an important step in executing our plan to be a
leader in RFID, and will expand our product offerings.
Matrics has focused its strategic RFID solutions efforts on
Electronic Product Code standards, which are the emerging global
RFID standards. Matrics has developed EPC-compliant RFID systems
for retail, defense, transportation and other vertical markets.
The Matrics product portfolio features RFID systems including
multi-protocol, EPC-compliant fixed readers; readers designed
for embedded applications, such as RFID printers and mobile
computers; high-performance antennas for RFID tag reading; and
EPC labels that can be attached to items such as containers,
pallets, cartons and more. The RFID tag family includes both
read-only and read/write functionality to address a wide range
of asset visibility applications. Matrics is also developing a
proprietary manufacturing process that is expected to provide
for higher volume and more cost effective manufacturing of tags.
The aggregate purchase price of $237,858 consisted of $230,000
in cash payments to the sellers and $7,858 in transaction costs,
primarily professional fees. The purchase price was funded from
borrowings under the $250,000 short-term credit facility (see
note 12b).
The results of Matrics have been included in Symbols
consolidated financial statements since September 9, 2004,
the acquisition date. Shown below is the purchase price
allocation, which summarizes the fair value of the assets
acquired and liabilities assumed at the date of acquisition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
12,778 |
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,605 |
|
Other assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
763 |
|
Identifiable intangible assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proprietary technology and know how (4 year useful life)
|
|
$ |
5,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
Patents (4 year useful life)
|
|
|
3,500 |
|
|
|
|
|
Customer relationships (5 year useful life)
|
|
|
4,700 |
|
|
|
|
|
Covenants not to compete (1.5 year useful life)
|
|
|
600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total identifiable intangible assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,500 |
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,800 |
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
194,358 |
|
Deferred tax liability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,583 |
) |
Other liabilities assumed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,363 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net assets acquired
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
237,858 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In accordance with FASB Interpretation No. 4
Applicability of FASB Statement No. 2 to Business
Combination Accounted for by the Purchase Method, the
$12,800 allocated to acquired in-process research and
development was written off immediately following the
acquisition. The write-off of the in-process
F-19
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
research and development was related to our product segment.
Current assets above includes acquired cash of $3,431.
The amount allocated to in-process research and development
represented a portion of the total value of the acquired assets.
We believe the Matrics acquisition is an important step in
executing our plan to be a leader in RFID and will expand our
offerings in the advanced data capture industry.
Our assumptions for IPR&D were based on our estimate of the
present value of the cash flows arising from each of the
material research and development projects that Matrics was
investing in at the time of closing. Each project was evaluated
based on the income approach. With the exception of the
proprietary manufacturing process, this was achieved by
discounting cash flows to be derived from the sales of the
products to their present value. For the proprietary
manufacturing process, the income approach was used by
estimating the gross margin benefit from the technology and
discounting the cash flows from that gross margin benefit. The
values allocated to the IPR&D and the technology assets
acquired were based upon several factors including the
generation of the technology acquired, the estimated lives and
future revenue and costs associated with the technology.
The products included in IPR&D ranged from the early stages
of development to the latter stages of development at the time
of acquisition. A discount rate ranging from 23% to 30% was used
for the projects to account for various risks, including the
technical risk, the risk that customers will not desire to
purchase the product, the risk around significant price erosion,
the risk of commercializing the technology, the risk that even
once successfully commercialized the technology may not yield
the gross margin benefit and for the broader market risk
associated with the adoption of RFID.
The following unaudited pro forma consolidated financial
information for the years ended December 31, 2004 and,
2003, give effect to the acquisition as if it had been
consummated as of the earliest period presented, after giving
effect to the following adjustments (i) amortization of
acquired intangible assets (ii) Symbols financing
costs, consisting of interest expense on the $250,000 short term
credit facility that would have been incurred had the
acquisition occurred as of January 1, 2003 and the
amortization of the debt issuance costs over the term (one-year)
of the short term credit facility and (iii) the related
income tax effects.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Revenue
|
|
$ |
1,739,308 |
|
|
$ |
1,533,949 |
|
Net earnings/(loss)
|
|
$ |
66,091 |
|
|
$ |
(21,858 |
) |
Diluted earnings/(loss) per share
|
|
$ |
.27 |
|
|
$ |
(.09 |
) |
The unaudited pro forma consolidated financial information is
presented for comparative purposes only and is not intended to
be indicative of the actual results that would have been
achieved had the transaction been consummated as of the dates
indicated above, nor does it purport to indicate results that
may be attained in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Raw materials
|
|
$ |
57,946 |
|
|
$ |
66,500 |
|
Work in progress
|
|
|
26,845 |
|
|
|
24,422 |
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
122,547 |
|
|
|
121,940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
207,338 |
|
|
$ |
212,862 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-20
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
The amounts shown above are net of inventory reserves of $55,247
and $109,331 as of December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively, and include inventory accounted for as consigned
of $61,005 and $34,564 as of December 31, 2004 and 2003,
respectively.
|
|
4. |
Property, plant and equipment.net |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Land
|
|
$ |
7,343 |
|
|
$ |
10,057 |
|
Buildings and improvements
|
|
|
70,362 |
|
|
|
72,380 |
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
130,603 |
|
|
|
121,530 |
|
Furniture, fixtures and office equipment
|
|
|
44,264 |
|
|
|
41,821 |
|
Computer hardware and software
|
|
|
247,121 |
|
|
|
198,658 |
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
23,090 |
|
|
|
18,169 |
|
Transportation
|
|
|
4,250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
527,033 |
|
|
|
462,615 |
|
Less: Accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(285,525 |
) |
|
|
(251,727 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
241,508 |
|
|
$ |
210,888 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5. |
Investment in marketable securities |
As a result of the November 2000 acquisition of Telxon
Corporation, we obtained 4,166.1 shares of Cisco Systems,
Inc. common stock (the Cisco shares). We also
obtained two derivative financial instruments related to the
Cisco shares (referred to collectively herein as the
Collar). The Collar essentially hedged our risk of
loss on the Cisco shares by utilizing purchased put options.
Conversely, the Collar arrangement also limited the potential
gain by employing written call options.
In January 2001, we sold 6.1 of the Cisco shares and
simultaneously terminated the existing Collar and entered into a
private Mandatorily Exchangeable Securities Contract for Shared
Appreciation Income Linked Securities (SAILS)
arrangement (see Note 12(e) with a highly rated financial
institution for the remaining 4,160 shares. These shares
had a market value of $80,288 and $100,797 at December 31,
2004 and 2003, respectively. Such shares are held as collateral
to secure the debt instrument associated with the SAILS and are
included in Investment in Marketable Securities in the
Consolidated Balance Sheets. The SAILS contain an embedded
equity collar, which effectively manages a large portion of our
exposure to fluctuations in the fair value of our holdings in
the Cisco shares. At maturity, the SAILS will be exchangeable
for shares of Cisco common stock or, at our option, cash in lieu
of shares. We account for the embedded equity collar as a
derivative financial instrument in accordance with the
requirements of SFAS No. 133 and the change in fair
value of this derivative between reporting dates is recognized
as other income/(expense). As there is a legal right of offset,
the derivative has been combined with the debt instrument and is
included in long-term debt in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
Approximately 3,411.2 of the Cisco shares are economically
hedged in conjunction with the SAILS arrangement and are
classified as trading securities. However, because these
securities collateralize the long-term debt underlying the SAILS
arrangement, they have been classified as non-current assets.
The changes in market value of these trading securities and
related derivative instrument of approximately $2,600, $(1,140),
and $16,275 for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003,
and 2002, respectively, have been included in other
(expense)/income in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The remaining 748.8 Cisco shares are classified as
available-for-sale securities in accordance with
SFAS No. 115 and on April 1, 2003 a portion of
the embedded equity collar described above was designated as a
fair value hedge of these securities. To the
F-21
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
extent the collar is effective, the change in fair value of the
Cisco shares classified as available for sale securities are
recorded as a component of other income or expense rather than
as other comprehensive income. The change in fair value of the
embedded equity collar is also recorded as a component of other
income or expense.
Under SFAS No. 115, available-for-sale securities are
required to be carried at their fair value, with unrealized
gains and losses, net of income taxes, recorded as a component
of accumulated other comprehensive earnings/(loss). Information
regarding marketable securities classified as available-for-sale
is presented in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Cost basis
|
|
$ |
10,090 |
|
|
$ |
10,090 |
|
Gross unrealized holding (loss) gain on available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
(29 |
) |
|
|
119 |
|
Gross unrealized holding gain on hedged available-for-sale
securities
|
|
|
5,333 |
|
|
|
9,069 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aggregate fair market value
|
|
$ |
15,394 |
|
|
$ |
19,278 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Based on the provisions of SFAS No. 115 and the
evidence reviewed, we determined that there were no declines in
market value for these investments which were other than
temporary in 2004, 2003 and 2002.
Information regarding marketable securities classified as
trading securities is presented in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Cost basis
|
|
$ |
142,844 |
|
|
$ |
142,844 |
|
Gross unrealized holding losses on trading securities
|
|
|
(77,008 |
) |
|
|
(59,986 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aggregate fair market value
|
|
$ |
65,836 |
|
|
$ |
82,858 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6. |
Goodwill and other intangible assets |
The changes in the carrying amount of goodwill for the years
ended December 31, 2004 and 2003 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Products | |
|
Services | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Balance as of January 1, 2003
|
|
$ |
244,014 |
|
|
$ |
57,009 |
|
|
$ |
301,023 |
|
Covigo acquisition
|
|
|
4,709 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,709 |
|
Translation adjustments
|
|
|
3,274 |
|
|
|
818 |
|
|
|
4,092 |
|
@POS goodwill adjustments(1)
|
|
|
(4,511 |
) |
|
|
(1,128 |
) |
|
|
(5,639 |
) |
Sweden earnout payment
|
|
|
709 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
709 |
|
Telxon goodwill adjustments
|
|
|
(1,942 |
) |
|
|
(485 |
) |
|
|
(2,427 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of December 31, 2003
|
|
$ |
246,253 |
|
|
$ |
56,214 |
|
|
$ |
302,467 |
|
Acquisition of Matrics
|
|
|
194,358 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
194,358 |
|
Brazil Acquisition
|
|
|
1,552 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
1,805 |
|
Trio acquisition
|
|
|
660 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
660 |
|
Translation adjustments
|
|
|
2,038 |
|
|
|
417 |
|
|
|
2,455 |
|
Telxon goodwill adjustments(2)
|
|
|
(4,462 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,462 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
440,399 |
|
|
$ |
56,884 |
|
|
$ |
497,283 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-22
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
|
|
(1) |
Adjustment related to recording certain deferred tax assets in
connection with the acquisition. |
|
(2) |
To adjust Telxon goodwill for previously recorded valuation
allowance booked on acquisition. |
Other than goodwill, finite life intangible assets, all of which
are subject to amortization, consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2004 | |
|
December 31, 2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Gross | |
|
Accumulated | |
|
Gross | |
|
Accumulated | |
|
|
Amount | |
|
Amortization | |
|
Amount | |
|
Amortization | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Patents, trademarks and tradenames
|
|
$ |
39,160 |
|
|
$ |
(18,433 |
) |
|
$ |
35,080 |
|
|
$ |
(24,670 |
) |
Purchased technology
|
|
|
33,500 |
|
|
|
(13,988 |
) |
|
|
27,800 |
|
|
|
(9,652 |
) |
Other
|
|
|
9,100 |
|
|
|
(3,935 |
) |
|
|
7,250 |
|
|
|
(2,079 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
81,760 |
|
|
$ |
(36,356 |
) |
|
$ |
70,130 |
|
|
$ |
(36,401 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These assets have estimated useful lives ranging from 1.5 to
8 years. Amortization expense for these assets was $10,918,
$10,220 and $6,849 for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002, respectively. Estimated future amortization
expense for the above finite life intangible assets, assuming no
additions or writeoffs, for each of the years ending
December 31, is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
$ |
12,767 |
|
2006
|
|
|
10,153 |
|
2007
|
|
|
9,652 |
|
2008
|
|
|
8,440 |
|
2009
|
|
|
3,031 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
1,361 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
45,404 |
|
|
|
|
|
In November 2000, we invested $35,000 in and licensed certain
intellectual property to AirClic Inc. (AirClic), a
business which allows wireless devices to scan bar codes and
transmit data to the Internet. In return, we received
convertible preferred stock of AirClic. We do not currently have
the right to convert the preferred stock into common stock of
AirClic and our ability to do so in the future is subject to
certain contractual restrictions. As we do not have the ability
to exercise significant influence over AirClic, we account for
this investment using the cost method. We periodically test the
carrying value of this investment for impairment. In
consideration of the outlook of AirClics business, the
general decline in the economy and the decline in information
technology spending in 2002, we determined that the decline in
the value of our investment in AirClic was other than temporary
in June 2002. We wrote down the carrying amount of the
investment to its estimated fair value of $2,800 by recording an
impairment of the investment of $32,200 which is shown as a
component of other income/(expense) in the Consolidated
Statements of Operations in 2002. In January 2003, we invested
an additional $750 in AirClic in exchange for convertible
preferred stock. This additional investment was also accounted
for under the cost method and increased our investment in
AirClic to $3,550. In March 2003, AirClic received additional
financing from other investors but the negative outlook for
AirClics business and the lack of a rebound in the
information technology sector and the economy in general
prompted us to record an additional impairment charge of $3,025
related to this investment during the three months ended
March 31, 2003. We subsequently wrote off our remaining
investment in AirClic of $525 by September 2003.
F-23
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
During the year ended December 31, 2001, we had accumulated
certain component inventories in anticipation of orders from
AirClic. As a result, during 2001, AirClic paid $7,000 with
respect to this component inventory. This payment was accounted
for as an advance payment for future inventory purchases. At
December 31, 2002, an accrued liability of $6,147 remained
outstanding under this obligation. In July 2003, we reached an
agreement with AirClic as it related to this obligation. The
remaining obligation of $4,992 as of July 2003 was settled by
making a cash payment of $2,497 to AirClic. Accordingly, we
recognized other income of $2,495 in the third quarter of 2003.
In February 2002, we loaned $1,000 to our former Chief Executive
Officer, Director and Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors.
This loan bore interest at an annual rate of LIBOR plus
100 basis points, which approximated 2.4 percent at
July 15, 2004, the date that the loan was paid off in full,
including accrued interest.
In addition, we also loaned our former Chief Executive Officer,
Director and Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors $500 in
October 1999. This loan bore interest at an annual rate of
7 percent and on July 15, 2004, the loan was paid off
in full, including accrued interest.
In January 2003, we loaned $500 to our Senior Vice President,
Corporate Development. At the time of the loan, he was not
considered to be an officer as such term is defined
in Rule 16a-1(f) of the Exchange Act and for purposes of
Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act. This loan was
non-interest bearing and was repaid in full as of March 1,
2004. He became an officer of the Company as defined in
Rule 16a-1(f) of the Exchange Act and for purposes of
Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act on March 10, 2004.
The purpose of these loans were for relocation expenses and the
purchase of new residences in connection with their employment
by Symbol. These loans were unsecured and were classified as
other assets in the Consolidated Balance Sheet as of
December 31, 2003.
During 2000, we entered into a $50,000 lease receivable
securitization agreement. This agreement matured on
December 31, 2003, and was subsequently extended until
December 31, 2005. During the years ended December 31,
2004 and 2003, we securitized approximately $0 and $7,275,
respectively, of our lease receivables in accordance with the
terms of the agreement. Losses on lease securitizations during
2004, 2003 and 2002 were approximately $0, $273 and $610,
respectively. For a discussion of retained interest, see
Note 1(j).
Key economic assumptions used in measuring the fair value of
retained interests at the date of securitization resulting from
securitizations completed during 2004 and 2003 (weighted based
on principal amounts securitized) were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Prepayment rate
|
|
|
N/A |
(1) |
|
|
N/A |
(1) |
Weighted-average remaining life (in years)
|
|
|
N/A |
(2) |
|
|
2.75 |
|
Expected credit losses
|
|
|
N/A |
(2) |
|
|
$ 73 |
|
Discount rate
|
|
|
N/A |
(2) |
|
|
9 percent |
|
F-24
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
The following table presents the fair values of retained
interest as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, along with key
economic assumptions used to derive the values as of year-end.
The table also presents the sensitivity of the current fair
value to immediate 10 percent and 20 percent adverse
changes in the listed economic assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Fair value of retained interest
|
|
$ |
3,849 |
|
|
$ |
8,720 |
|
Weighted-average remaining life (in years)
|
|
|
1.24 |
|
|
|
1.72 |
|
Prepayment speed assumption
|
|
|
N/A |
(1) |
|
|
N/A |
(1) |
|
Impact on fair value of 10 percent adverse change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact on fair value of 20 percent adverse change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected credit losses (annual rate)
|
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
|
1.0 |
% |
|
Impact on fair value of 10 percent adverse change
|
|
$ |
3,839 |
|
|
$ |
8,695 |
|
|
Impact on fair value of 20 percent adverse change
|
|
$ |
3,829 |
|
|
$ |
8,671 |
|
Discount rate
|
|
|
9.0 |
% |
|
|
9.0 |
% |
|
Impact on fair value of 10 percent adverse change
|
|
$ |
3,824 |
|
|
$ |
8,652 |
|
|
Impact on fair value of 20 percent adverse change
|
|
$ |
3,800 |
|
|
$ |
8,585 |
|
|
|
(1) |
Our lease portfolios historically have not been subject to
prepayment risk. |
|
(2) |
No lease securitizations were completed during 2004. |
These sensitivities are hypothetical and should be used with
caution. As the amounts indicate, changes in fair value based on
a 10 percent and 20 percent variation in assumptions
generally cannot easily be extrapolated because the relationship
of the change in the assumptions to the change in fair value may
not be linear. Also, in the above table, the effect that a
change in a particular assumption may have on the fair value is
calculated without changing any other assumption. In reality,
changes in one factor may result in changes in another, which
might magnify or counteract the sensitivities. Static pool
credit losses are calculated by summing actual and projected
future credit losses and dividing them by the original balance
of each securitization pool. At December 31, 2004 and 2003,
static pool net credit losses for leases securitized were not
material.
The table below summarizes certain cash flows received
from/(paid to) securitization trusts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Proceeds from new securitizations
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
4,400 |
|
Collections used by the trust to purchase new balances in
revolving securitizations
|
|
|
6,695 |
|
|
|
11,440 |
|
Servicing fees received
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
356 |
|
Purchases of delinquent assets
|
|
|
(581 |
) |
|
|
(44 |
) |
F-25
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
The table below presents information about delinquencies and
components of reported and securitized financial assets at
December 31, 2004 and 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Total | |
|
Delinquent | |
|
Total | |
|
Delinquent | |
|
|
Principal | |
|
Principal | |
|
Principal | |
|
Principal | |
|
|
Amount | |
|
over | |
|
Amount | |
|
over | |
|
|
of Leases | |
|
90 Days | |
|
of Leases | |
|
90 Days | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Leases held in portfolio
|
|
$ |
3,031 |
|
|
$ |
2,469 |
|
|
$ |
2,750 |
|
|
$ |
2,368 |
|
Leases held for securitization
|
|
|
3,839 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
969 |
|
|
|
|
|
Leases securitized
|
|
|
10,305 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
27,728 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total leases managed
|
|
$ |
17,175 |
|
|
$ |
2,515 |
|
|
$ |
31,447 |
|
|
$ |
2,446 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leases securitized of $10,305 and $27,728 at December 31,
2004 and 2003, respectively, is comprised of our retained
interest in future cash flows of those leases measured at fair
value of $3,849 and $8,720, respectively, and the financial
institutions interest in those leases of $6,456 and
$19,008 respectively, and is shown as a component of other
assets on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.
We monitor our potential credit risk associated with lease
securitizations and provide for an allowance for doubtful
accounts which is maintained at a level that we believe is
sufficient to cover potential losses on leases securitized.
Credit losses historically have not been material.
|
|
10. |
Accounts payable and accrued expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Accounts payable
|
|
$ |
91,413 |
|
|
$ |
104,305 |
|
Accrued compensation, fringe benefits and related payroll taxes
|
|
|
88,667 |
|
|
|
71,765 |
|
Accrued litigation
|
|
|
86,625 |
|
|
|
179,000 |
|
Accrued professional fees
|
|
|
19,408 |
|
|
|
11,805 |
|
Accrued warranty
|
|
|
20,956 |
|
|
|
20,828 |
|
Accrued rebates
|
|
|
18,169 |
|
|
|
13,161 |
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
89,677 |
|
|
|
89,802 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
414,915 |
|
|
$ |
490,666 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11. |
Restructuring and impairment charges |
a. Telxon acquisition
We recorded certain restructuring, impairment and merger
integration related charges related to our Telxon acquisition
during 2001 and 2002. Approximately $61 relating to lease
obligations was included in accrued restructuring expenses as of
December 31, 2003. During the year ended December 31,
2004, $53 was paid and as of December 31, 2004, $8 remained
in accrued restructuring expenses.
b. Manufacturing transition
In 2001, we began to transition volume manufacturing away from
our Bohemia, New York facility to lower cost locations,
primarily our Reynosa, Mexico facility and Far East contract
manufacturing partners. As a result of these activities, we
incurred restructuring charges during 2002 and 2001. During the
first quarter of 2004, the Company entered into a sub-lease
arrangement at its Bohemia, New York facility and recorded the
anticipated sub-lease income of approximately $2,861 as a
reduction of the lease obligation cost, which had been
previously recorded in 2001. This amount has been recorded as a
reduction to product cost of revenue
F-26
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
during the first quarter of 2004. Included in accrued
restructuring expenses as of December 31, 2004 is $623 of
net lease obligations relating to these manufacturing
restructuring charges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease | |
|
|
|
|
Workforce | |
|
Obligation | |
|
|
|
|
Reductions | |
|
Costs | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Balance at December 31, 2001
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
10,282 |
|
|
$ |
10,282 |
|
Additional provision (reduction)
|
|
|
4,843 |
|
|
|
(3,477 |
) |
|
|
1,366 |
|
Utilization/payments
|
|
|
(4,843 |
) |
|
|
(1,211 |
) |
|
|
(6,054 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
5,594 |
|
|
|
5,594 |
|
Utilization/payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,238 |
) |
|
|
(1,238 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,356 |
|
|
|
4,356 |
|
Anticipated sub-lease income adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,861 |
) |
|
|
(2,861 |
) |
Utilization/payments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(872 |
) |
|
|
(872 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
623 |
|
|
$ |
623 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
c. Global services transition
In 2003, our global services organization initiated
restructuring activities which included transferring a large
percentage of our repair operations to Mexico and the Czech
Republic, reorganizing our professional services group to
utilize third party service providers for lower margin
activities, and reorganizing our European management structure
from a country based structure to a regional structure. The
total costs incurred in connection with this restructuring,
which related almost entirely to workforce reductions, is
approximately $2,856, of which $2,633 and $223 was recorded as a
component of cost of revenue and operating expenses,
respectively, in 2003.
In 2003, we initiated additional restructuring activities in
connection with our decision to relocate additional product
lines from New York to Mexico. The costs associated with this
restructuring relate to workforce reductions and transportation
costs. The total amount incurred in connection with this
restructuring activity is approximately $961, all of which was
recorded as a component of cost of revenue in 2003. These
restructuring activities were completed by June 30, 2003.
In connection with the global services transition, the Company
recorded additional provisions of $8,795 during 2004 which
relate to lease obligation costs net of sub-lease income and
further work force reductions. These amounts have been recorded
as a component of service cost of revenue in the year ended
2004. These restructuring activities are expected to be
completed in 2005.
d. General and administrative restructuring
During the second quarter of 2004, the shared services
organization initiated restructuring activities that included
the consolidating and transitioning of back office transactional
activities to the Czech Republic. The costs associated with this
restructuring relate to workforce reductions. The total amount
incurred in connection with this restructuring activity was
$5,025 in 2004, all of which was recorded as a component of
operating expenses. These restructuring activities are expected
to be completed in the first quarter of 2005. Further shared
service restructuring activities are being considered and future
benefits are not yet defined, therefore, we cannot reasonably
estimate the remaining cost expected to be incurred.
e. In 2003, we initiated additional restructuring
activities to exit buildings that were acquired with the
acquisition of @POS and Covigo, Inc. The costs associated with
this restructuring relate primarily to lease obligation costs,
adjusted for anticipated sub-lease income. The total amount
incurred in connection with this restructuring activity was
$958, all of which was recorded as a component of operating
expenses. These restructuring activities were completed by
September 30, 2003. During the fourth quarter of 2004, we
F-27
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
recorded an adjustment of $145 for @POS sub-lease assumptions
that did not occur. This was recorded as a component of
operating expense.
Details of the global services transition and general and
administrative restructuring charges and remaining balances as
of December 31, 2004 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lease | |
|
Asset | |
|
|
|
|
Workforce | |
|
Obligation | |
|
Impairments | |
|
|
|
|
Reductions | |
|
Costs | |
|
and other | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Balance of December 31, 2002
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
Provision cost of revenue
|
|
|
3,429 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
3,639 |
|
Provision operating expenses
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
721 |
|
|
|
323 |
|
|
|
1,181 |
|
Utilization/payments
|
|
|
(3,487 |
) |
|
|
(151 |
) |
|
|
(359 |
) |
|
|
(3,997 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2003
|
|
$ |
79 |
|
|
$ |
572 |
|
|
$ |
172 |
|
|
$ |
823 |
|
Provision cost of revenue
|
|
|
5,160 |
|
|
|
3,585 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
8,795 |
|
Provision operating expenses
|
|
|
5,025 |
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,170 |
|
Foreign Exchange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,060 |
|
|
|
1,060 |
|
Utilization/payments
|
|
|
(4,867 |
) |
|
|
(1,497 |
) |
|
|
(144 |
) |
|
|
(6,508 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
5,397 |
|
|
$ |
2,805 |
|
|
$ |
1,138 |
|
|
$ |
9,340 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A summary of the combined restructuring, impairment and related
charges (reductions) incurred in each period are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Product cost of revenue (Manufacturing)
|
|
$ |
(2,861 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(3,477 |
) |
Product cost of revenue (Manufacturing)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,020 |
|
Product cost of revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,639 |
|
|
|
|
|
Service cost of revenue
|
|
|
8,795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of revenue
|
|
|
5,934 |
|
|
|
3,639 |
|
|
|
(457 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Workforce reductions
|
|
|
5,025 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
1,823 |
|
Other
|
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
1,044 |
|
|
|
767 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring and impairment charges
|
|
$ |
5,170 |
|
|
$ |
1,181 |
|
|
$ |
2,590 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-28
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Senior Secured Term Loan Facility(a)
|
|
$ |
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Senior Secured Revolving Credit Facility(a)
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term financing: short-term credit facility(b)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prior Revolving Credit Facility(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Secured Installment Loan(d)
|
|
|
10,369 |
|
|
|
|
|
SAILS exchangeable debt(e)
|
|
|
83,727 |
|
|
|
98,927 |
|
Other(f)
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt
|
|
|
294,159 |
|
|
|
99,246 |
|
Less: Current maturities
|
|
|
118,072 |
|
|
|
234 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
176,087 |
|
|
$ |
99,012 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
On December 29, 2004, we entered into our new credit
facility to be used (i) to repay in full our outstanding
senior indebtedness, comprised of the short-term credit facility
and our prior revolving credit facility; (ii) for working
capital and general corporate purposes; and (iii) to pay
certain fees and expenses incurred in connection with such
transactions. Pursuant to our new credit facility, the lenders
severally agreed to provide us the following: (a) a senior
secured term loan facility in an aggregate principal amount of
$100,000 and (b) a senior secured revolving credit facility
in an aggregate principal amount of up to $150,000 with a
$20,000 sub limit available for letters of credit. Our new
credit facility is secured on a first priority basis by
(i) a pledge of all of the capital stock or other equity
interests of our domestic subsidiaries, (ii) a pledge of
65% of the capital stock or other equity interests of selected
overseas subsidiaries located in the United Kingdom, the
Netherlands and Japan, (iii) 100% of the capital stock of
the manufacturing entity in Reynosa, Mexico and all of its other
assets and (iv) all our other domestic assets (other than
real estate) and the stock of our domestic subsidiaries. |
|
|
On December 29, 2004, we borrowed $100,000 on the term loan
facility and $100,000 on the revolving credit facility. The term
loan facility is payable at approximately $11,111 per
quarter, which commences on December 15, 2005 through the
term loan maturity date of December 30, 2007. The revolving
credit facility matures on December 30, 2009. The revolving
credit facility is classified as short term on the Consolidated
Balance Sheet as our intention is to pay it off currently. We
incurred approximately $3,600 of deferred financing costs
related to the new credit facility. The interest rate on the new
credit facility is the greater of (i) the prime rate and
(ii) the federal funds rate plus 0.5%, plus, in both cases,
the applicable margin for U.S.-based loans. For Eurodollar-based
loans, the rate is the adjusted LIBO rate (defined as the LIBO
rate multiplied by the statutory reserve rate) plus the
applicable margin. The applicable margin is based upon our
leverage ratio (defined as the ratio of our total indebtedness
to our consolidated EBITDA for the period of the most recent
four fiscal quarters) plus 0.25% to 1% for U.S.-based loans and
1.25% to 2% for Eurodollar-based loans. The interest rate on our
new credit facility, which includes our term loan facility and
revolving credit facility, was 6.0% at December 31, 2004.
The new credit facility contains a number of security and
financial covenants, we are in compliance with all covenants as
of December 31, 2004. |
|
(b) |
On September 9, 2004, in connection with the acquisition of
Matrics, we entered into a short-term credit facility in the
amount of $250,000. The short-term credit facility, which was a
senior unsecured borrowing, initially had an annual interest
rate of three-month LIBOR plus 400 basis points and matured
on September 9, 2005. The annual interest rate increased by
100 basis points on November 1, 2004 and would have
increased by an additional 50 basis points at the end of
each one-month period thereafter |
F-29
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
|
|
|
until September 9, 2005, but would not have exceeded 11.5%
(or 13.5% if there have been an event of default). If the
short-term credit facility was not repaid in full prior to
September 9, 2005, it may have been converted to exchange
notes pursuant to an indenture that would have matured on
September 9, 2011. This facility contained a number of
security and financial covenants. On December 29, 2004,
this facility was replaced by the new credit facility referred
to in (a) above. We wrote off approximately $6,300 of
deferred financing costs when this facility was paid off on
December 29, 2004. |
|
(c) |
Through September 15, 2003, we had a $350,000 unsecured
revolving credit facility with a syndicate of U.S. and
international banks. These borrowings bore interest at either
LIBOR plus 75 and 100 basis points at September 15,
2003 (which approximated 1.86 percent at such date), or the
base rate of the syndication agent bank, contingent upon various
stipulations by the lender, which approximated 4.0 percent
at September 15, 2003. As a result of the length of time
necessary to restate our financial statements beginning on
September 16, 2003, we would have been in violation of one
of the covenants of our credit agreement that requires the
timely filing of financial statements with the SEC. On
September 15, 2003, we reached an agreement with the bank
group and obtained a waiver to provide us additional time to
become current with our periodic filings with the SEC. Under the
revised credit agreement, the credit facility was reduced from
$350,000 to $100,000 and we voluntarily agreed to limit our
usage of the credit facility to $50,000 until such time as we
became current with our periodic filings. In addition, we
pledged our U.S. trade receivables and agreed to retain
$75,000 of unencumbered, worldwide cash until that time. |
|
|
|
In November 2003, this credit facility was replaced with a
$30,000 secured credit line which expired in May 2006. These
borrowings which were secured by U.S. trade receivables
bore interest at either LIBOR plus 200 basis points which
approximated 3.1% at December 31, 2003 or, the base rate of
the syndication agent bank, which approximated 4.0% at
December 31, 2003. As of December 31, 2003, there were
no borrowings outstanding under the secured credit line. On
February 27, 2004, this credit facility was increased to
$45,000 with the same interest provisions. On March 16,
2004, this credit facility was increased to $60,000 with the
same interest provisions. On December 29, 2004, this
facility was replaced by the new credit facility referred to in
(a) above. |
|
|
(d) |
On March 31, 2004, we entered into a purchase money secured
installment loan with a bank for $13,825. The loan is payable in
four semiannual installments of $3,655, including interest,
commencing October 1, 2004. The proceeds received under the
loan were used to finance the purchases of certain software. The
fixed interest rate on this installment loan is 5.33%. This
installment loan is collateralized by the purchased software. |
|
(e) |
In order to provide additional liquidity to be used for general
corporate purposes, including the repayment of debt outstanding
under our revolving credit facility and to effectively lock in
the gain recognized upon the sale of our Cisco shares, while
avoiding a tax liability in January 2001, we entered into a
private Mandatorily Exchangeable Securities Contract for Shared
Appreciation Income Linked Securities (SAILS) with a
highly rated financial institution. The securities that underlie
the SAILS contract represent our investment in Cisco common
stock, which was acquired in connection with the Telxon
acquisition (see Note 5). This debt has a seven-year
maturity and bears interest at a cash coupon rate of
3.625 percent of the original notional amount of debt of
$174,200. At maturity, the SAILS are exchangeable for shares of
Cisco common stock or, at our option, cash in lieu of shares.
Net proceeds from the issuance of the SAILS and termination of
an existing freestanding collar arrangement were approximately
$262,246. The SAILS contain an embedded equity collar, which
effectively manages a large portion of our exposure to
fluctuations in the fair value of our holdings in Cisco common
stock. We account for the embedded equity collar as a derivative
financial instrument in accordance with the requirements of
SFAS 133. The change in fair value of this derivative
between reporting dates is recognized as other income. The
derivative has been combined with the debt instrument in
long-term debt as there is a legal right of offset in accordance
with FASB Interpretation No. 39, Offsetting of |
F-30
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
|
|
|
Amounts Related to Certain Contracts. Since inception, the
gross SAILS liability remains unchanged at $174,200. The
derivative asset was valued at $90,473 and $75,273 on
December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The net SAILS
liability, when offset by the derivative asset, represents
$83,727 and $98,927 of the total long-term debt balance
outstanding at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. We
have the option to terminate the SAILS arrangement prior to its
scheduled maturity. If we terminate the SAILS arrangement prior
to its scheduled maturity by delivering our Cisco common stock
our cash payment would not exceed the present value of our
future coupon payments at the time of termination. At the
present time, we do not anticipate terminating the SAILS
arrangement prior to its scheduled maturity date. |
|
|
(f) |
We have available $25,000 in uncommitted U.S. dollar and
foreign currency lines of credit with several global banks with
a range of borrowing rates and varying terms that continue until
such time as either party wishes to terminate the agreements. As
of December 31, 2004, there were no outstanding borrowings
under these agreements. The remaining balances in other
long-term debt of $63 and $319 at December 31, 2004 and
2003, respectively, represent capital lease obligations and
various other loans maturing through 2007. |
|
|
|
Based on the borrowing rates currently available to us for bank
loans with similar terms, the fair values of borrowings under
the Credit Agreement, senior notes and promissory notes,
approximate their carrying values. |
|
|
Our capital lease obligations are included in long-term debt in
the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The combined aggregate amount
of long-term debt and capital lease maturities for each of the
years ending December 31 are as follows: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
$ |
118,072 |
|
2006
|
|
|
47,906 |
|
2007
|
|
|
44,449 |
|
2008
|
|
|
83,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
294,159 |
|
|
|
|
|
The provision for (benefit from) income taxes consists of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
CURRENT:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$ |
11,630 |
|
|
$ |
52 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
State and local
|
|
|
7,721 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
6,944 |
|
|
|
6,786 |
|
|
|
6,149 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,295 |
|
|
|
6,838 |
|
|
|
6,149 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DEFERRED:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
20,829 |
|
|
|
(12,114 |
) |
|
|
(23,402 |
) |
|
State and local
|
|
|
(137 |
) |
|
|
3,306 |
|
|
|
(2,836 |
) |
|
Foreign
|
|
|
(5,065 |
) |
|
|
2,576 |
|
|
|
3,274 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,627 |
|
|
|
(6,232 |
) |
|
|
(22,964 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total provision for (benefit from) income taxes
|
|
$ |
41,922 |
|
|
$ |
606 |
|
|
$ |
(16,815 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-31
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
The components of income before income taxes are as follows for
the three years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
United States
|
|
$ |
115,165 |
|
|
$ |
(24,796 |
) |
|
$ |
(72,662 |
) |
International
|
|
|
8,604 |
|
|
|
28,697 |
|
|
|
10,932 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
123,769 |
|
|
$ |
3,901 |
|
|
$ |
(61,730 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A reconciliation between the statutory U.S. Federal income
tax rate and our effective tax rate is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
|
% of | |
|
|
Amount | |
|
Pretax | |
|
Amount | |
|
Pretax | |
|
Amount | |
|
Pretax | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Statutory U.S. Federal rate provision (benefit)
|
|
$ |
43,319 |
|
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
$ |
1,365 |
|
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
$ |
(21,605 |
) |
|
|
(35.0 |
)% |
State taxes, net of federal tax effect
|
|
|
4,930 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
2,149 |
|
|
|
55.1 |
|
|
|
(1,843 |
) |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
Tax credits
|
|
|
(10,181 |
) |
|
|
(8.2 |
) |
|
|
(5,892 |
) |
|
|
(151.1 |
) |
|
|
(4,491 |
) |
|
|
(7.2 |
) |
Writeoff of In Process R&D
|
|
|
4,480 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-deductible fines
|
|
|
12,250 |
|
|
|
9.9 |
|
|
|
1,750 |
|
|
|
44.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Extraterritorial income exemption
|
|
|
(4,254 |
) |
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
|
|
(1,037 |
) |
|
|
(26.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income of foreign subsidiaries taxed at differing tax rates
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(757 |
) |
|
|
(19.4 |
) |
|
|
1,064 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
Change in valuation allowance
|
|
|
(8,346 |
) |
|
|
(6.7 |
) |
|
|
2,180 |
|
|
|
55.9 |
|
|
|
6,166 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
Non-deductible compensation
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
370 |
|
|
|
9.5 |
|
|
|
2,895 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
Other non-deductible items
|
|
|
634 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
564 |
|
|
|
14.5 |
|
|
|
580 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(980 |
) |
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
|
(86 |
) |
|
|
(2.3 |
) |
|
|
419 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
41,922 |
|
|
|
33.9 |
% |
|
$ |
606 |
|
|
|
15.5 |
% |
|
$ |
(16,815 |
) |
|
|
(27.2 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our effective tax rate will change from year to year based on
recurring factors including the geographical mix of income
before taxes, state and local taxes, the ratio of permanent
items to pretax book income and the implementation of various
global tax strategies, as well as nonrecurring events.
Net tax (costs)/benefits of $28,400 in 2004, $(12,419) in 2003
and $16,650 in 2002 were recorded directly through equity which
included net tax benefits related to currency translations,
unrealized losses on available for sale securities and certain
employee benefit plans. In addition, net tax benefits of $15,299
were recorded as part of a reduction of goodwill in connection
with the Matrics and Telxon acquisitions.
F-32
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
The components of our deferred tax assets and liabilities at
December 31, 2004 and 2003, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables
|
|
$ |
64,114 |
|
|
$ |
46,220 |
|
Inventory
|
|
|
17,893 |
|
|
|
49,226 |
|
Accrued compensation and associate benefits
|
|
|
19,341 |
|
|
|
36,793 |
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
81,253 |
|
|
|
80,296 |
|
Accrued restructuring and severance costs
|
|
|
1,046 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
Deferred revenue-current
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,102 |
|
Deferred revenue-long term
|
|
|
9,616 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased technology and other intangibles
|
|
|
130,204 |
|
|
|
20,777 |
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
4,307 |
|
|
|
1,764 |
|
Cumulative translation adjustments
|
|
|
2,357 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
115,639 |
|
|
|
164,048 |
|
Capital loss carryforwards
|
|
|
12,965 |
|
|
|
12,493 |
|
Tax credit carryforwards
|
|
|
88,012 |
|
|
|
96,169 |
|
Charitable contribution carryforwards
|
|
|
1,046 |
|
|
|
2,114 |
|
Other, net
|
|
|
1,281 |
|
|
|
5,510 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets
|
|
|
549,074 |
|
|
|
532,069 |
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(37,288 |
) |
|
|
(43,936 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
|
511,786 |
|
|
|
488,133 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments
|
|
|
(69,027 |
) |
|
|
(57,095 |
) |
Net investment in sales-type leases
|
|
|
(4,314 |
) |
|
|
(5,991 |
) |
Deferred revenue-long-term
|
|
|
(9,113 |
) |
|
|
(5,244 |
) |
Deferred patent and product development costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,762 |
) |
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(12,763 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(95,217 |
) |
|
|
(77,092 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred income tax assets
|
|
$ |
416,569 |
|
|
$ |
411,041 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts recognized as deferred tax assets in the Consolidated
Balance Sheets consists of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Current
|
|
$ |
179,844 |
|
|
$ |
182,571 |
|
Non-current
|
|
|
236,725 |
|
|
|
228,470 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
416,569 |
|
|
$ |
411,041 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We have available federal, state and foreign net operating loss
carryforwards of approximately $283,259, $583,501 and $7,290,
respectively, at December 31, 2004. Such loss carryforwards
expire in accordance with provisions of applicable tax law and
have remaining lives ranging from 1 to 20 years and $6,544
of these loss carryforwards have no expiration date. Certain
loss carryforwards are more likely than not to expire unused.
F-33
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
We also have a capital loss carryforward of approximately
$36,010 for federal and state jurisdictions at December 31,
2004. Such loss carryforward expires in 4 years in
accordance with provisions of applicable tax laws.
We also have available federal, state and foreign credit
carryforwards of approximately $78,692, $8,880 and $440,
respectively, at December 31, 2004. Such credits have
expiration dates ranging from 1 to 20 years, and $21,346 of
these credits has no expiration date. Certain credit
carryforwards are more likely than not to expire unused.
The valuation allowance decreased by $6,648 during 2004 and
increased by $12,500 during 2003. The 2004 decrease relates to
foreign tax credits which the Company expects to utilize based
on the current forecasts and an increase in the foreign tax
credit carryforward period from 5 to 10 years pursuant to
AJCA. This decrease is slightly offset by an increase in the
valuation allowance for state and local loss carryforwards that
are more likely than not to expire. The increase in 2003 relates
to limitations on federal net operating loss carryforwards and
tax credits of acquisitions, as well as, foreign tax credits and
state and foreign loss carryforwards that are more likely than
not to expire before they can be utilized. Subsequent
recognition of a substantial portion ($30,908) of the deferred
tax asset relating to such net operating loss and tax credit
carryforwards against which a valuation allowance has been
recorded would result in a reduction of goodwill recorded in
connection with the Telxon, @POS and/or Covigo acquisitions.
|
|
14. |
Commitments and contingencies |
a. Lease agreements
The combined aggregate amount of required future minimum rental
payments under non-cancelable capital and operating leases for
each of the years ending December 31 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital | |
|
Operating | |
|
|
Leases | |
|
Leases | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
2005
|
|
$ |
49 |
|
|
$ |
22,709 |
|
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19,031 |
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,582 |
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,779 |
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,634 |
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,727 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum payments
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
$ |
110,462 |
|
Less amounts representing interest
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Present value of future lease payments
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less current portion
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term capital lease obligation
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rent expense under operating leases was $21,238, $19,979 and
$17,103 for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and
2002, respectively.
b. Employment contracts
We have, or had, executed employment contracts with certain
senior executives that vary in length, for which we have a
minimum commitment aggregating approximately $4,736 and $5,519
at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. In February
2002, our former President and Chief Executive Officer announced
his retirement. In connection therewith, we recorded a pre-tax
compensation and related benefits charge of $8,597
F-34
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
in 2002 which is included in selling, general and administrative
expenses in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
c. Letters of credit and purchase commitments
At December 31, 2004, we had outstanding letters of credit
of $3,118 and $16,882 of unused letters of credit. As of
December 31, 2004 and 2003, we have included in our accrued
liabilities $4,094 and $1,110 respectively, for purchase
commitments for which a loss was recognized.
d. Legal matters
We are a party to lawsuits in the normal course of business.
Litigation in the normal course of business, as well as the
lawsuits and investigations described below, can be expensive,
lengthy and disruptive to normal business operations. Moreover,
the results of complex legal proceedings and government
investigations are difficult to predict. Unless otherwise
specified, Symbol is currently unable to estimate, with
reasonable certainty, the possible loss, or range of loss, if
any, for the lawsuits and investigations described herein. An
unfavorable resolution to any of the lawsuits or investigations
described below could have a material adverse effect on
Symbols business, results of operations or financial
condition.
Government investigations
In May 2001, in response to an inquiry from the SEC, we retained
a law firm to conduct an internal investigation into certain
allegations concerning our accounting practices, focusing on
specific transactions with two of our customers but also
including a limited review of other large transactions. The law
firm retained an accounting firm to assist it in the
investigation. We subsequently discovered that this
investigation was hindered by certain of our former employees.
As a result of actions by these former employees, the SEC
expressed dissatisfaction with the investigation.
In March 2002, we retained a second law firm to conduct a
wide-ranging internal investigation into our accounting
practices. The investigation was conducted over a period of
approximately eighteen months with the assistance of an outside
forensic accounting team. The SEC and the United States
Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of New York
(Eastern District) commenced separate but related
investigations relating to our accounting practices.
The investigation found that, during the period covered by the
restatement, certain members of former management engaged in,
directed and/or created an environment that encouraged a variety
of inappropriate activities that resulted in accounting errors
and irregularities affecting our previously issued financial
statements that we have now restated. The errors and
irregularities caused by these actions primarily concerned the
timing and amount of product and service revenue recognized. In
particular, the investigation found that revenue was accelerated
from the appropriate quarters to earlier quarters through a
variety of improper means and, on a more limited basis, revenue
was improperly created and inflated on a net basis.
Additionally, there were errors and irregularities associated
with the establishment and utilization of certain reserves and
restructurings, including certain end-of-quarter adjustments
that were apparently made in order to achieve previously
forecasted financial results. There were also errors and/or
irregularities associated with the administration of certain
options programs, as well as several categories of cost of
revenue and operating expenses, including efforts to
artificially reduce reported inventory.
In addition, the internal investigation uncovered efforts by
certain then employees, including certain members of then
management, to impede both the initial and second internal
investigations. The employees responsible for directing such
conduct resigned or were terminated.
The investigation found that, in addition to the specific items
of misconduct giving rise to the need for the restatement, there
was a failure by our former management to establish an
appropriate control environment, and there were significant
failures in our internal controls and procedures resulting from
numerous causes,
F-35
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
including inadequate hiring of qualified and experienced
personnel, insufficient training and supervision of personnel, a
decentralized accounting structure for operations in the United
States and inadequate systems and systems interfaces. The
investigation also found instances in which some members of
former management and sales and finance-related employees
devoted insufficient attention and resources to ensuring
accurate accounting and financial reporting. As the guilty pleas
of three former senior members of our finance group illustrate,
there were also instances in which such activity rose to the
level of criminal misconduct. All of the members of senior
management who were primarily responsible for the errors and
irregularities underlying the restatement either have been
terminated from employment at Symbol as part of the internal
investigation or have left Symbol, including Tomo Razmilovic,
one of our former Presidents, Chief Executive Officers and
directors, and Kenneth Jaeggi, our former Senior Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer. We assembled a new management team
and appointed new board members beginning in mid-2002.
In November 2002, we announced the unaudited, preliminary
expected magnitude of the anticipated restatement of our
financial statements, and updated that information on several
occasions over the subsequent eleven months. Accordingly, the
selected financial data for 1998, 1999, 2000 and 2001, financial
statements for the years ended December 31, 2000 and 2001,
and unaudited selected quarterly information for each of the
four quarters of 2001 and the first three quarters of 2002 were
restated in our 2002 Annual Report on Form 10-K/ A.
In connection with our accounting practices various class action
lawsuits were filed against us and certain of our former
management and our former board of directors in March 2002,
March 2003 and May 2003. For more information see
Securities litigation matters.
On June 3, 2004, we announced that we resolved the
investigation by the Eastern District relating to our past
accounting practices by entering into a non-prosecution
agreement with the Eastern District. As a result of this
non-prosecution agreement, no criminal complaint will be filed
against us. In addition, on June 3, 2004, we announced an
agreement with the SEC to resolve allegations against us
relating to our past accounting practices that were under
investigation by the SEC. Pursuant to the agreements with the
Eastern District and the SEC, we have paid a total of $37,000 in
cash to a restitution fund for members of the class consisting
of purchasers of our common stock from February 15, 2000 to
October 17, 2002, and $3,000 to the United States Postal
Inspection Service Consumer Fraud Fund. In addition to these
payments, the non-prosecution agreement included an
acknowledgement by us that between 1999 and 2002, as a result of
the actions of certain of our former employees, we
(a) violated federal criminal law in connection with
accounting practices involving improper sales transactions,
unsupported and fictitious accounting entries and the
manipulation of our accounting reserves and expenses; and
(b) filed and caused to be filed materially false and
misleading financial statements and other documents with the
SEC. As part of the non-prosecution agreement, we agreed to
continue our cooperation with the Eastern District and the SEC,
and to implement remedial measures, including, but not limited
to, retaining an independent, government-approved examiner to
review our internal controls, financial reporting practices and
our compliance with the settlement agreements and establishing
and maintaining an annual training and education program
designed to diminish the possibility of future violations of the
federal securities laws. If we violate the agreement with the
Eastern District or the SEC or commit or attempt to commit other
violations, such as accounting offenses that were not the
subject of the investigations, we will be subject to federal
criminal charges. Pursuant to the non-prosecution agreement we
have waived certain defenses that may have otherwise been
available to us in the event of a federal criminal charge,
including the statute of limitations, and will be subject to
prosecution for any offense, including any offense related to
our past accounting practices. In addition, in the event of a
violation of the agreement and a federal criminal charge,
statements that were made by or on behalf of us to the Eastern
District, SEC and the Postal Inspection Service, including the
acknowledgments of responsibility described above, will be
deemed admissible in evidence and certain evidentiary rules will
not be available to us. Pursuant to the agreement with the SEC,
the SEC filed, and the court has approved, a Final Consent
Judgment in the Eastern District of New York providing for
injunctive relief, enjoining us from further violations of the
antifraud, reporting, books and
F-36
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
records and internal control provisions of the federal
securities laws, and a civil penalty in the amount of $37,000,
as described above. We paid both the $37,000 and the $3,000 to
the United States Postal Inspection Service Consumer Fraud Fund
prior to June 30, 2004.
On October 26, 2004, the Company issued a press release
announcing its financial results for the third quarter 2004. On
November 8, 2004, the Company issued a second press
release, revising some of the previously reported numbers. The
revised numbers included a reduction of approximately
$13.3 million in revenue for the nine months ending
September 30, 2004, as compared to the results previously
reported in the press release of October 26, 2004. The
November 8, 2004 press release stated that the Company had
discovered certain discrepancies in the amount of inventory at a
distributor as well as inventory on hand that affected its
previously-announced results. On November 15, 2004,
the Company filed its Form 10-Q for the third quarter of
2004.
The non-prosecution agreement between the Company and the United
States Attorneys Office for the Eastern District of New
York, described previously, provides that should the Company
violate the agreement or commit a crime in the future, the
Company would be subject to prosecution for any offense,
including any offense related to the Companys past
accounting practices. The Company has retained outside counsel
to investigate the facts and circumstances surrounding the
erroneous numbers included in the October 26, 2004 press
release. The Company has been cooperating with the informal
requests made by the Eastern District and by the SEC regarding
this matter, including whether Symbol has complied with the
injunction entered into in connection with its June 2004
settlement with the SEC and the non-prosecution agreement with
the Eastern District. There can no assurance that these events
will not give rise to an enforcement action or other proceeding
brought by the Eastern District or SEC.
Securities litigation matters
On June 3, 2004, we announced our settlement of the
Pinkowitz, Hoyle and Salerno class action lawsuits, which are
described below. Under the settlement, we agreed to pay to the
class members an aggregate of $1,750 in cash and an aggregate
number of shares of common stock having a market value of
$96,250, subject to a minimum and maximum number of shares based
upon the volume-weighted moving average trading price of our
common stock for the five day period immediately prior to our
payment of the common stock to the class (Determined
Price). If the Determined Price is greater than
$16.41 per share, then we will issue 5,865.3 shares of
our common stock to the class. If the Determined Price is
between $16.41 per share and $11.49 per share, then we
will issue to the class the number of shares of common stock
equal to a market value of $96,250 divided by the Determined
Price. If the Determined Price is less than $11.49 per
share, we will issue 8,376.8 shares of our common stock to
the class. The settlement also provides that we have the right
to pay up to an additional $6.0 million in cash to reduce
the number of shares of our common stock that we are required to
deliver in an amount equal to the amount of additional cash
divided by the Determined Price. If (i) there occurs any
event that would lead to the de-listing of our common stock or
our board of directors recommends the approval of a tender offer
for the purchase of a majority of our common stock or
(ii) the Determined Price is less than $11.90 per
share, then the lead counsel for the plaintiffs can require us
to place into escrow the number of shares that would otherwise
be payable to the class and would have the right to sell all or
any portion of the escrowed shares and invest such proceeds
until distribution to the class. If we do not deliver our common
stock as required by the settlement agreement within the ten
days of such requirement, the lead counsel for the plaintiffs
may terminate the settlement agreement. The court held a
fairness hearing regarding the settlement on October 4,
2004 and approved the fairness of the settlement by an order
entered on October 20, 2004. On November 17, 2004, we
delivered 586.5 shares, or 10% of the settlement amount (at
$16.41 per share), as satisfaction of the plaintiffs
attorneys fees, pursuant to the courts order. We
expect to deliver the balance of the shares required to be
issued under the settlement of 5,278.8 shares in the first
half of 2005. As of December 31, 2004, the Company has
reflected $86,625 as accrued litigation costs in its current
liabilities. For every $1.00 per share above
$16.41 per share on the date the shares are issued, an
additional
F-37
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
non-cash litigation charge of approximately $5.3 (pre-tax) and
$3.2 (after-tax) will be required to be recorded in our
statements of operations in 2005.
In addition to the payments described above, the $37,000 civil
penalty imposed by the SEC, which we have already paid, will be
distributed to the class. Also, as part of the settlement,
Dr. Jerome Swartz, our co-founder and former chairman, has
paid $4,000 in cash to the class to settle the claims against
him in the Pinkowitz and Hoyle class action lawsuits.
|
|
|
Pinkowitz v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al. |
On March 5, 2002, a class action lawsuit was filed in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New
York on behalf of purchasers of our common stock between
October 19, 2000 and February 13, 2002, inclusive,
against us and certain members of our former management and our
former board of directors. The complaint alleged that the
defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing
materially false and misleading statements throughout the class
period that had the effect of artificially inflating the market
price of our securities. This case is subject to the settlement
agreement described above.
|
|
|
Hoyle v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al. |
|
|
|
Salerno v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al. |
On March 21, 2003, a class action lawsuit was filed in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New
York against us and certain members of our former management and
our former board of directors. On May 7, 2003, a virtually
identical class action lawsuit was filed against the same
defendants by Joseph Salerno.
The Hoyle and Salerno complaints were brought on behalf of a
class of former shareholders of Telxon Corporation
(Telxon) who obtained our common stock in exchange
for their Telxon stock in connection with our acquisition of
Telxon in November 2000. The complaint alleges that the
defendants violated the federal securities laws by issuing a
Registration Statement and Joint Proxy Statement/ Prospectus in
connection with the Telxon acquisition that contained materially
false and misleading statements that had the effect of
artificially inflating the market price of our securities. These
cases are subject to the settlement agreement described above.
Smart Media litigation
|
|
|
Telxon v. Smart Media of Delaware, Inc. |
On December 1, 1998, Telxon filed suit against Smart Media
of Delaware, Inc. (SMI) in the Court of Common Pleas
for Summit County, Ohio in a case seeking a declaratory judgment
that Telxon did not contract to develop SMIs products or
invest approximately $3,000 in SMIs business and that it
did not fraudulently induce SMI to refrain from engaging in
business with others or interfere with SMIs business
relationships. On March 12, 1999, SMI filed its answer and
counterclaim denying Telxons allegations and alleging
counterclaims against Telxon for negligent misrepresentation,
estoppel, tortious interference with business relationship and
intentional misrepresentation and seeking approximately $10,000
in compensatory damages, punitive damages, fees and costs. In
addition, William Dupre, an individual employed by SMI at that
time, asserted similar counterclaims against Telxon. In November
2000, Symbol acquired Telxon with these claims still pending.
On September 17, 2003, the jury awarded approximately
$218,000 in damages against Telxon, of which approximately
$6,000 was awarded to Mr. Dupre. The court denied
Telxons motions for judgment in its favor notwithstanding
the verdict, for a new trial and for a reduction in the amount
of the jury verdicts. On May 6, 2004, the court entered
judgment against Telxon for approximately $218,000 in damages,
plus statutory interest from the date of the verdicts and
granted a motion to add Symbol as a counterclaim defendant with
F-38
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
respect to the counterclaims asserted by Mr. Dupre. Prior
to these court rulings, SMI withdrew its motion to add Symbol as
a counterclaim defendant with respect to the counterclaims
asserted by SMI. We and Telxon have filed notices of appeal of
these rulings and the related verdicts. Symbol and Telxon have
deposited approximately $50,000 into an interest-bearing court
escrow account to stay execution of the judgment against both
Symbol and Telxon pending resolution of the appeal. Symbol and
Telxon have filed their opening briefs on appeal. SMI and
Mr. Dupre filed their responsive briefs on or about
January 31, 2005 and Symbol and Telxon are due to respond
on or before March 15, 2005.
Our available cash, including cash available under our existing
lines of credit, may not be sufficient to pay jury verdicts of
this size and we would need to obtain additional financing in
order to pay the judgment entered against Telxon in this matter.
In addition, we currently have not recorded any liability in our
consolidated financial statements with respect to the jury
verdicts and the judgment entered as we believe that, in
accordance with the relevant guidance set forth in Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 5, Accounting for
Contingencies, an unfavorable outcome of this litigation
is not probable at this time. However, there can be no assurance
that we will not be found to be ultimately liable for the full
amount of the judgment, plus statutory interest from the date of
the verdicts. In the event we are found liable, and the judgment
is not paid, we would be in violation of the terms of our new
credit facility.
Pending patent and trademark litigation
|
|
|
Metrologic Instruments, Inc. v. Symbol Technologies,
Inc. |
On June 19, 2003, Metrologic Instruments, Inc.
(Metrologic) filed a complaint against us in the
United States District Court, District of New Jersey, alleging
patent infringement and breach of contract, and seeking monetary
damages of approximately $2,300 (as of March 31, 2004) and
termination of the cross-licensing agreement between the
parties. We answered the complaint and asserted counterclaims
for declaratory judgments of invalidity and noninfringement of
Metrologics patents and for non-breach of the
cross-licensing agreement. We intend to defend the case
vigorously on the merits.
|
|
|
Symbol Technologies, Inc. et al. v. Lemelson
Medical, Educational & Research Foundation, Limited
Partnership |
On July 21, 1999, we and six other members of the Automatic
Identification and Data Capture industry (Auto ID
Companies) jointly initiated a lawsuit against the
Lemelson Medical, Educational, & Research Foundation,
Limited Partnership (Lemelson Partnership). The suit
was commenced in the United States District Court, District of
Nevada in Reno, Nevada, but was subsequently transferred to the
federal court in Las Vegas, Nevada. In the litigation, the Auto
ID Companies seek, among other remedies, a declaration that
certain patents, which have been asserted by the Lemelson
Partnership against end users of bar code equipment are invalid,
unenforceable and not infringed.
The Lemelson Partnership has contacted many of the Auto ID
Companies customers demanding a one-time license fee for
certain so-called bar code patents transferred to
the Lemelson Partnership by the late Jerome H. Lemelson. We have
received many requests from our customers asking that we
undertake the defense of these claims using our knowledge of the
technology at issue, and the other Auto ID Companies have
received similar requests. Certain of our customers have
requested indemnification against the Lemelson
Partnerships claims from us, and certain customers of the
other Auto ID Companies have requested similar indemnification
from them, individually and/or collectively with other equipment
suppliers. We believe that generally we have no obligation to
indemnify our customers against these claims and that the
patents being asserted by the Lemelson Partnership against our
customers with respect to bar code equipment are invalid,
unenforceable and not infringed.
On January 23, 2004, the court concluded that
Lemelsons patent claims are unenforceable under the
equitable doctrine of prosecution laches; that the asserted
patent claims as construed by the court are not
F-39
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
infringed by us because use of the accused products does not
satisfy one or more of the limitations of each and every
asserted claim; and that the claims are invalid for lack of
enablement even if construed in the manner urged by Lemelson.
The court entered its judgment in favor of Symbol and the other
Auto ID Companies on January 23, 2004. The Lemelson
Partnership filed several post-trial motions all of which were
denied by the court. The Lemelson Partnership filed a notice of
appeal on June 23, 2004. Briefs on appeal have been filed
by the parties.
|
|
|
Intermec IP Corp. v. Matrics, Inc. |
On June 7, 2004, Intermec IP Corp. (Intermec)
filed suit against Matrics in the Federal District Court in
Delaware asserting infringement of four patents owned by
Intermec relating to RFID readers and RFID tags. The complaint
against Matrics seeks payment of a reasonable
royalty as well as an injunction against Matrics from
infringing such patents. On September 9, 2004, Symbol
consummated the acquisition of Matrics. Matrics was merged into
Symbol on October 29, 2004, and accordingly, Symbol is
defending the case vigorously on the merits.
|
|
|
Nanopower Technologies, Inc. v. Symbol Technologies,
Inc. and Matrics Technology Systems, Inc. |
On August 11, 2004, Nanopower Technologies, Inc.
(Nanopower), a California corporation, filed a civil
suit against Matrics and Symbol in state court in California.
The suit alleges that Matrics breached a consulting agreement,
confidentiality agreement and intellectual property licensing
agreement pertaining to certain ultra low voltage RFID tag
start-up technology to which Nanopower claims ownership and that
the defendants violated California state law relating to the
protection of trade secrets. The suit also named Symbol as a
defendant because of Symbols announced intention to
purchase Matrics. Nanopower alleges that Symbol (i) has
improperly received disclosure of Nanopowers confidential
information, (ii) has misappropriated, or will,
misappropriate Nanopowers trade secrets as a consequence
of the acquisition of Matrics and (iii) will benefit from
the alleged breaches of the intellectual property licensing and
consulting agreements. On September 9, 2004, Symbol
consummated the acquisition of Matrics. Matrics was merged into
Symbol on October 29, 2004, and accordingly, Symbol is
defending the case vigorously on the merits.
Matrics agreements with Nanopower provide for mandatory
arbitration of these disputes in Washington, DC and contain an
exclusive venue clause requiring any effort to obtain injunctive
relief to be filed in Maryland. The state court complaint was
removed to federal court and Matrics has filed a motion to
transfer the suit to Maryland in anticipation of a subsequent
stay pending arbitration. On October 1, 2004, before the
Court heard Matrics motion, Nanopower agreed to and the
parties filed a stipulation to stay the case pending mediation,
and if necessary, arbitration.
Other litigation
|
|
|
Barcode Systems, Inc. v. Symbol Technologies Canada,
Inc. and Symbol Technologies, Inc. |
On March 19, 2003, Barcode Systems, Inc. (BSI)
filed an amended statement of claim in the Court of Queens
Bench in Winnipeg, Canada, naming Symbol Technologies Canada,
Inc. and Symbol as defendants. BSI alleges that we deliberately,
maliciously and willfully breached our agreement with BSI under
which BSI purported to have the right to sell our products in
western Canada and to supply Symbols support operations
for western Canada. BSI has claimed damages in an unspecified
amount, punitive damages and special damages.
Symbol denies BSIs allegations and claims that it properly
terminated any agreements between BSI and Symbol. Additionally,
Symbol filed a counterclaim against BSI alleging trademark
infringement, depreciation of the value of the goodwill attached
to Symbols trademark and damages in the sum of Canadian
$1,300, representing the unpaid balance of products sold by
Symbol to BSI. Discovery in the matter is ongoing.
F-40
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
On October 30, 2003, BSI filed an Application For Leave
with the Canadian Competition Tribunal (Tribunal).
BSI is seeking an Order from the Tribunal that would require us
to accept BSI as a customer on the usual trade terms
as they existed prior to the termination of their agreement in
April 2003. The Tribunal granted leave for BSI to proceed with
its claim against us on January 15, 2004. We filed an
appeal of the Tribunals decision before the Federal Court
of Appeals on January 26, 2004, and a brief in support of
the appeal on April 22, 2004. On October 7, 2004, the
Federal Court of Appeals dismissed Symbols appeal,
allowing BSI to make its application before the Tribunal against
Symbol.
On November 17, 2003, BSI filed an additional lawsuit in
British Columbia, Canada against us and a number of our
distributors alleging that we refused to sell products to BSI,
conspired with the other defendants to do the same and used
confidential information to interfere with BSIs business.
We intend to defend against these claims vigorously.
|
|
|
Lic. Olegario Cavazos Cantu, on behalf of Maria Leonor Cepeda
Zapata vs. Symbol de Mexico, Sociedad de R.L. de C.V. |
Lic. Olegario Cavazos Cantu, on behalf of Maria Leonor Cepeda
Zapata filed a lawsuit against Symbol de Mexico, Sociedad de
R.L. de C.V. (Symbol Mexico) in October 2003 to
reclaim property on which our Reynosa facility is located. The
lawsuit was filed before the First Civil Judge of First
Instance, 5th Judicial District, in Reynosa, Tamaulipas, Mexico.
The First Civil Judge ordered the recording of a lis pendens
with respect to this litigation before the Public Register of
Property in Cd. Victoria, Tamaulipas.
The plaintiff alleges that she is the legal owner of a tract of
land of 100 hectares, located within the area comprising the
Rancho La Alameda, Municipality of Reynosa, Tamaulipas,
within the Bajo Rio San Juan, Tamaulipas, irrigation
district. The plaintiff is asking the court to order Symbol
Mexico to physically and legally deliver to the plaintiff the
portion of land occupied by Symbol Mexico.
Symbol Mexico acquired title to the lots in the Parque
Industrial Reynosa from Edificadora Jarachina, S.A. de C.V.
pursuant to a deed instrument. An Owners Policy of
Title Insurance was issued by Stewart Title Guaranty
Company in connection with the above-mentioned transaction in
the amount of $13,400. A Notice of Claim and Request for Defense
of Litigation was duly delivered on behalf of Symbol to Stewart
Title Guaranty Company on November 4, 2003.
In late November 2004, the First Level Civil Judge entered
a final judgment in this matter for Symbol. In his decision, the
judge held that, while the plaintiff had established she had
title to a tract of land, she failed to establish that her
parcel is the property on which Symbols Reynosa
manufacturing facility is located. The judge further held that,
based on the plaintiffs complaint, it was not possible to
identify the location of the property to which plaintiff claims
title.
The plaintiff has appealed the judgment to the Court of Second
Instance.
|
|
|
Bruck Technologies Handels GmbH European Commission
Complaint |
In February 2004, we became aware of a notice from the European
Competition Commission (EC) of a complaint lodged
with it by Bruck Technologies Handels GmbH (Bruck)
that certain provisions of the Symbol
PartnerSelecttm
program violate Article 81 of the EC Treaty. Bruck has
asked the EC to impose unspecified sanctions. We have provided
all information initially requested by the EC and will respond
to any additional inquiries. No action has been taken and the
matter is pending. We intend to defend against these claims
vigorously.
F-41
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
Securities litigation matters in which Symbol has been
realigned as plaintiff
|
|
|
Bildstein v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al. |
On April 29, 2003, a shareholder derivative lawsuit was
filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of New York against certain members of our former
management and board of directors and against Symbol as a
nominal defendant. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants
violated Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder and common and
state law by authorizing the distribution of proxy statements in
2000, 2001 and 2002. Plaintiff sought the cancellation of all
affirmative votes at the annual meetings for 2000, 2001 and
2002, the cancellation of all awards under the option plans
approved pursuant to those proxy statements, an injunction
preventing the implementation of those option plans and all
awards thereunder and an accounting by the defendants for all
injuries and damages suffered by Symbol, plus all costs and
expenses, including but not limited to attorneys fees,
incurred in connection with the action.
In September 2004, the court approved a settlement that Symbol
reached with the plaintiff. As part of the settlement, Symbol
and the plaintiffs agreed to a stipulation pursuant to which
Symbol was realigned as plaintiff, and the action dismissed
without prejudice so as to permit Symbol to pursue the claims
asserted in this case and in the Gold litigation described
below. As part of the stipulation, Symbol agreed to pay and has
since paid $120 to Bildsteins counsel for services
rendered in the case.
|
|
|
Gold v. Symbol Technologies, Inc., et al. |
On December 18, 2003, a derivative action lawsuit was filed
in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against Symbol
and certain of our former senior management. The complaint
alleges that the defendants violated the federal securities laws
by issuing materially false and misleading statements from
January 1, 1998 through December 31, 2002 that had the
effect of artificially inflating the market price of
Symbols securities and that the defendants (1) failed
to properly oversee or implement policies, procedures and rules
to ensure compliance with federal and state laws requiring the
dissemination of accurate financial statements, which ultimately
caused Symbol to be sued for, and exposed to liability for,
violations of the anti-fraud provisions of the federal
securities laws, (2) engaged in insider trading in
Symbols common stock, (3) wasted corporate assets and
(4) improperly awarded a severance of approximately
$13 million to Tomo Razmilovic, one of our former
Presidents and Chief Executive Officers. Plaintiff sought to
recover incentive-based compensation paid to certain of our
former senior management in reliance on materially inflated
financial statements and to impose a trust to recover cash and
other valuable assets received by the former senior management
defendants and former Symbol board members.
On July 27, 2004, the court approved a settlement that
Symbol reached with the plaintiff. The settlement calls for the
lawsuit to continue as direct litigation by Symbol on its own
behalf against the defendants. As part of the settlement, the
plaintiff consents to entry of Symbols proposed order
under which Symbol will now be the plaintiff in the case. Symbol
plans to continue to pursue this lawsuit vigorously and, as part
of the settlement, has agreed to pay $185 to cover the
reasonable legal fees of the plaintiffs lawyers.
On October 28, 2004, Symbol filed its amended complaint in
the action, naming Mr. Razmilovic as the defendant. By
Order dated November 9, 2004, the Court stayed the action
against Mr. Razmilovic pending the resolution of the
Governments criminal case against
Mr. Razmilovics co-defendants. In addition, on
November 9, 2004, Symbol filed a complaint in the United
States District Court, Eastern District of New York against
certain other former officers and employees in connection with
their past employment at Symbol and the facts and circumstances
that led to the Companys restatement. On
November 19, 2004, the Court issued a stay, pending
the resolution of the governments criminal action against
the defendants.
F-42
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
On July 26, 2004, Symbols Board of Directors approved
a $0.01 per share semi-annual cash dividend, which amounted
to $2,405 and was paid on October 8, 2004 to shareholders
of record on September 17, 2004.
On February 10, 2004, Symbols Board of Directors
approved a $0.01 per share semi-annual cash dividend, which
amounted to $2,338 and was paid on April 9, 2004 to
shareholders of record on March 19, 2004.
On March 10, 2003, Symbols Board of Directors
approved a $0.01 per share semi-annual cash dividend, which
amounted to $2,312 and was paid on April 28, 2003 to
shareholders of record on April 14, 2003.
On August 11, 2003, the Board of Directors approved a $0.01
semi-annual cash dividend which amounted to $2, 312 and was paid
on September 26, 2003 to shareholders of record on
September 5, 2003.
On February 19, 2002, Symbols Board of Directors
approved a $0.01 per share semi-annual cash devidend, which
amounted to 2,292 and was paid on April 5, 2002 to
shareholders of record on March 11, 2002.
On August 12, 2002, the Board of Directors approved a $0.01
semi-annual cash dividend which amounted to 2,306 and was paid
on October 7, 2002 to shareholders of record on
September 13, 2002.
a. Stock option plan
There are a total of 49,955,372 shares of common stock
reserved for issuance under our stock option plans at
December 31, 2004. Stock options granted to date generally
vest over a one-to-five year period, expire after 10 years
and have exercise prices equal to the market value of our common
stock at the date of grant. A summary of changes in the stock
option plans is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares under Option | |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Weighted | |
|
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
Option Price | |
|
|
|
Exercise | |
|
|
per Share | |
|
Shares | |
|
Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
Shares under option at January 1, 2002
|
|
$ |
1.58 to $41.22 |
|
|
|
36,307 |
|
|
$ |
14.33 |
|
Granted
|
|
$ |
7.40 to $ 9.62 |
|
|
|
8,676 |
|
|
$ |
8.69 |
|
Exercised
|
|
$ |
1.58 to $11.02 |
|
|
|
(3,150 |
) |
|
$ |
6.06 |
|
Cancelled
|
|
$ |
2.44 to $37.11 |
|
|
|
(3,655 |
) |
|
$ |
23.82 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares under option at December 31, 2002
|
|
$ |
1.58 to $41.22 |
|
|
|
38,178 |
|
|
$ |
12.82 |
|
Granted
|
|
$ |
10.25 to $16.79 |
|
|
|
7,068 |
|
|
$ |
13.51 |
|
Exercised
|
|
$ |
1.65 to $ 8.67 |
|
|
|
(308 |
) |
|
$ |
5.43 |
|
Cancelled
|
|
$ |
1.80 to $41.22 |
|
|
|
(4,784 |
) |
|
$ |
16.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares under option at December 31, 2003
|
|
$ |
1.58 to $41.22 |
|
|
|
40,154 |
|
|
$ |
12.54 |
|
Granted
|
|
$ |
12.57 to $18.40 |
|
|
|
7,301 |
|
|
$ |
15.50 |
|
Exercised
|
|
$ |
1.58 to $17.19 |
|
|
|
(13,130 |
) |
|
$ |
6.57 |
|
Cancelled
|
|
$ |
2.46 to $41.22 |
|
|
|
(8,214 |
) |
|
$ |
17.43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares under option at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
3.46 to $41.22 |
|
|
|
26,111 |
|
|
$ |
14.84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares exercisable at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
3.46 to $41.22 |
|
|
|
11,185 |
|
|
$ |
14.84 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares exercisable at December 31, 2003
|
|
$ |
1.58 to $41.22 |
|
|
|
24,332 |
|
|
$ |
11.19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares exercisable at December 31, 2002
|
|
$ |
1.58 to $41.22 |
|
|
|
21,249 |
|
|
$ |
10.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-43
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
The following table summarizes information concerning
outstanding and exercisable options as of December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted | |
|
|
|
Weighted | |
|
|
|
|
Remaining | |
|
Average | |
|
|
|
Average | |
Range of |
|
Number | |
|
Life | |
|
Exercise | |
|
Number | |
|
Exercise | |
Exercise Prices |
|
Outstanding | |
|
(Years) | |
|
Price | |
|
Exercisable | |
|
Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
$ 3.45-$ 5.17
|
|
|
524 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
$ |
4.66 |
|
|
|
524 |
|
|
$ |
4.66 |
|
$ 5.18-$ 7.77
|
|
|
1,911 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
$ |
6.78 |
|
|
|
1,446 |
|
|
$ |
6.72 |
|
$ 7.78-$11.67
|
|
|
6,397 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
$ |
9.16 |
|
|
|
3,288 |
|
|
$ |
9.23 |
|
$11.68-$17.52
|
|
|
13,269 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
$ |
15.03 |
|
|
|
3,708 |
|
|
$ |
15.62 |
|
$17.53-$26.29
|
|
|
903 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
$ |
21.52 |
|
|
|
510 |
|
|
$ |
23.33 |
|
$26.30-$39.45
|
|
|
3,062 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
$ |
30.26 |
|
|
|
1,675 |
|
|
$ |
31.19 |
|
$39.46-$41.22
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
$ |
41.22 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
$ |
41.22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26,111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,185 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2004, an aggregate of 16,227 shares
remain available for grant under the stock option plans. The tax
benefits arising from stock option exercises during the years
ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 in the amount of
$25,665, $439 and $139 respectively, were recorded in
stockholders equity as additional paid-in capital.
As an accommodation to certain stock option plan participants
(including certain officers and directors), an informal practice
began in or around the early 1990s, whereby certain
officers and directors were afforded a look-back period (no more
than 30 days) for purposes of determining the market price
to be used in connection with the specific exercise. In
addition, these individuals were given an extended period of
time in which to pay for their option exercises. These practices
were contrary to the terms of the relevant option plans. As this
practice allowed certain participants to choose exercise dates
outside of the approved plan terms and also allowed these
participants to extend the period of time in which to pay for
their option exercise, the price of the option at grant date was
not fixed and determinable. Accordingly, in accordance with
Accounting Principles Board Opinion No. 25,
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, our
financial statements reflect as compensation expense the change
in market price of the common stock underlying these options
granted to plan participants that could have participated in
this practice from the date of grant until the options either
expired or were exercised. Effective July 30, 2002, this
practice of options exercise ended resulting in ceasing the
accounting for such options under variable plan accounting.
As of March 31, 2003, due to the inability of Symbol to
make timely filings with the Commission, our stock option plans
were held in abeyance, meaning that our employees could not
exercise their options until we became current with out filings.
As an accommodation to both current and former Symbol associates
whose options were impacted by this suspension, the Compensation
Committee of the Board approved an abeyance program that allowed
associates whose options were affected during the suspension
period the right to exercise such options up to 90 days
after the end of the suspension period. This resulted in a new
measurement date for those options, which led to a non-cash
accounting compensation charge of $10,539 for the intrinsic
value of those vested options when the employee either
terminated employment during the suspension period or within the
90 day period after the end of the suspension period. On
February 25, 2004 this suspension period ended.
F-44
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
b. Outside directors options and stock purchase
warrants
All options and stock purchase warrants issued to outside
directors vest over a one-to-four year period, expire after
10 years and have exercise prices equal to the market value
of our common stock at the date of grant. A summary of changes
in the outside directors options and stock purchase
warrants is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average | |
|
|
Option Price | |
|
Number | |
|
Exercise | |
|
|
per Share | |
|
of Shares | |
|
Price | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
Shares under option at January 1, 2002
|
|
$ |
3.33 |
|
|
to |
|
$ |
35.83 |
|
|
|
1,098 |
|
|
$ |
21.52 |
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
8.17 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
$ |
8.17 |
|
|
Exercised
|
|
$ |
3.33 |
|
|
to |
|
$ |
7.37 |
|
|
|
(177 |
) |
|
$ |
5.16 |
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
$ |
9.83 |
|
|
to |
|
$ |
35.83 |
|
|
|
(163 |
) |
|
$ |
29.31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares under option at December 31, 2002
|
|
$ |
3.33 |
|
|
to |
|
$ |
35.83 |
|
|
|
858 |
|
|
$ |
21.87 |
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
16.79 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
$ |
16.79 |
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares under option at December 31, 2003
|
|
$ |
3.33 |
|
|
to |
|
$ |
35.83 |
|
|
|
1,008 |
|
|
$ |
21.11 |
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
13.83 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
$ |
13.83 |
|
|
Exercised
|
|
$ |
4.43 |
|
|
to |
|
$ |
9.83 |
|
|
|
(244 |
) |
|
$ |
6.89 |
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
$ |
3.33 |
|
|
to |
|
$ |
35.83 |
|
|
|
(614 |
) |
|
$ |
27.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares under option at December 31, 2004
|
|
$ |
13.83 |
|
|
to |
|
$ |
16.79 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
$ |
15.61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares exercisable at December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
16.79 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
$ |
16.79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares exercisable at December 31, 2003
|
|
$ |
3.33 |
|
|
to |
|
$ |
35.83 |
|
|
|
680 |
|
|
$ |
21.36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares exercisable at December 31, 2002
|
|
$ |
3.33 |
|
|
to |
|
$ |
35.83 |
|
|
|
534 |
|
|
$ |
19.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table indicates the number of common shares
issuable upon exercise and the exercise price per share of all
outstanding outside directors options and stock purchase
warrants as of December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of | |
|
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
Shares | |
|
|
|
Exercisable at | |
|
|
Issuable upon | |
|
Exercise Price | |
|
December 31, | |
Exercisable to |
|
Exercise | |
|
per Share | |
|
2004 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(In thousands) | |
|
|
|
(In thousands) | |
2013
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
$ |
16.79 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
2014
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
$ |
13.83 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38 |
|
c. Employee stock purchase plan
Under our employee stock purchase plan, participants may
purchase shares of stock for an amount equal to 85 percent
of the lesser of the closing price of a share of stock on the
first trading day of the period or the last trading day of the
period.
The stock sold to plan participants shall be authorized but
unissued common stock, treasury shares or shares purchased in
the open market. The aggregate number of shares which may be
issued pursuant to the plan is 4,898.4. As of December 31,
2004, 3,093.8 shares were issued to participants and
subsequent to December 31, 2004, 167.8 shares were
issued to participants, all of which were purchased in the open
market.
F-45
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
During 2003, as a result of our delinquent filings with the SEC,
we incurred a non-cash compensation expense of $6,137 associated
with our ESPP as the ESPP lost its tax exempt status.
d. Stockholder rights plan
In August 2001, our Board of Directors adopted a stockholder
rights plan. In connection with the adoption of the rights plan,
the Board designated and reserved 500 shares of
Series A Junior Participating preferred stock and has
declared a dividend of one preferred stock purchase right (the
rights) for each share of our common stock
outstanding on September 14, 2001. The rights will continue
to be represented by, and trade with, our common stock
certificates unless the rights become exercisable. The rights
become exercisable (with certain exceptions) only in the event
that any person or group acquires beneficial ownership of, or
announces a tender or exchange offer for, 15 percent or
more of the outstanding shares of our common stock. The rights
will expire on August 13, 2011, unless earlier redeemed,
exchanged or terminated in accordance with the rights plan.
e. Treasury stock
The Companys treasury stock is comprised of shares
purchased in open market transactions pursuant to programs
authorized by the Board of Directors, shares tendered by
executive officers to us (with certain restrictions) to pay
option prices and taxes in connection with stock option
exercises in accordance with the provisions in our stock option
plans, exercises of warrants by board members under the 1998
plan, shares purchased in the open market to be re-issued in
connection with our ESPP, and other transactions described below.
Below is a summary of the changes in our treasury stock for the
years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Shares | |
|
$ Amount | |
|
Shares | |
|
$ Amount | |
|
Shares | |
|
$ Amount | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Balance January 1
|
|
|
26,130 |
|
|
$ |
(239,029 |
) |
|
|
25,962 |
|
|
$ |
(236,476 |
) |
|
|
24,849 |
|
|
$ |
(222,104 |
) |
Acquisition of Treasury Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased in open market
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
(3,631 |
) |
Shares tendered relating to executive stock option exercises(a)
|
|
|
4,060 |
|
|
|
(64,230 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,159 |
|
|
|
(17,320 |
) |
ESPP shares purchased
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
(2,092 |
) |
|
|
528 |
|
|
|
(5,110 |
) |
|
|
625 |
|
|
|
(5,141 |
) |
Shares tendered relating to legal settlement(b)
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
(1,684 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total acquired
|
|
|
4,348 |
|
|
|
(68,006 |
) |
|
|
528 |
|
|
|
(5,110 |
) |
|
|
2,234 |
|
|
|
(26,092 |
) |
Re-issuance of Treasury Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Directors warrant exercises
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
1,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
463 |
|
ESPP shares allocated
|
|
|
(581 |
) |
|
|
6,232 |
|
|
|
(360 |
) |
|
|
2,557 |
|
|
|
(671 |
) |
|
|
7,601 |
|
Restricted shares issued to executive(c)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(400 |
) |
|
|
3,656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total re-issued
|
|
|
(682 |
) |
|
|
7,248 |
|
|
|
(360 |
) |
|
|
2,557 |
|
|
|
(1,121 |
) |
|
|
11,720 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance December 31,
|
|
|
29,796 |
|
|
$ |
(299,787 |
) |
|
|
26,130 |
|
|
$ |
(239,029 |
) |
|
|
25,962 |
|
|
$ |
(236,476 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Such executives acquired approximately 4,170 and 736 additional
shares of common stock in the years ended December 31, 2004
and 2002, respectively. In 2004, executives tendered additional
shares amounting to $24,498 for which the Company paid the tax
liability on the option exercise on their behalf. |
|
(b) |
|
On August 10, 2004, Dr. Jerome Swartz, a former
executive officer tendered these shares as a partial payment of
a legal settlement. |
F-46
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
|
|
|
(c) |
|
In 2002, we re-issued these shares of treasury stock to our new
President and Chief Executive Officer. These shares had a market
value of $2,992 at the date of issuance. This officer was
restricted from selling or transferring these shares for a
period of two years from the date of issuance. On
December 30, 2004, all of these shares were sold by the
officer at a market value of $6,580. |
f. Restricted stock
In May 2004, the Company granted 920 shares of restricted
stock awards to certain executives and non-employee directors of
the Company. On the date of grant, the market value of these
restricted stock awards aggregated $13,005. The non-employee
director restricted stock awards totaled 20 shares and
cliff-vest at January 1, 2005. The remaining 900 executive
restricted stock awards cliff-vest in five years provided the
Companys return on net assets for four consecutive
quarters does not exceed 16.4%. If the Companys return on
net assets for any four consecutive quarters exceeds 16.4% as
defined in the grant document, portions of the executive
restricted stock awards vesting will be accelerated. In November
2004, one associate left the Company and forfeited her 48
restricted shares from the May 2004 grant. As a result of this
forfeiture, in the fourth quarter of 2004 the Company reversed
the original transaction that recorded the granting of the
48 shares and reduced the amount of compensation expense to
be recognized in future periods. Compensation expense related to
these awards currently is estimated to be $715 per quarter
and could accelerate if targets are met.
In September and October 2004, the Company granted
440 shares of restricted stock awards to certain employees
associated with the Matrics, Inc. acquisition; one a service
based grant (220 shares) and another a performance
accelerated grant (220 shares). On the dates of the grants
the market value of these awards aggregated $5,553. The service
based grants vest 30 percent in eighteen months, with the
remaining 70 percent vesting three years from the date of
the grant. The performance accelerated grants cliff vest in five
years from the date of the grant. In January 2005, one associate
left the Company and forfeited his 20 restricted shares from the
October 2004 grant. As a result of this forfeiture, in the first
quarter of 2005 the Company will reverse the original
transaction that recorded the granting of the 20 shares and
will reduce the amount of compensation expense to be recognized
in future periods. Compensation expense related to these awards
currently is estimated to be $418 per quarter and could
accelerate if targets are met.
|
|
16. |
Associate benefit plans |
a. Profit sharing retirement plan
We maintain a profit sharing retirement plan for all associates
meeting certain service requirements. Generally, we contribute
monthly 50 percent of up to 6 percent of
associates contributions, up to the maximum amount allowed
by law. Plan expense for the years ended December 31, 2004,
2003 and 2002 was $9,374, $8,564, and $8,155 respectively.
b. Health benefits
We pay a portion of costs incurred in connection with providing
associate and dependant health benefits through programs
administered by various insurance companies. Such costs amounted
to $20,944, $20,824 and $19,381 for the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively.
F-47
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
c. Executive retirement plan
We maintain an Executive Retirement Plan (the Plan)
in which certain highly compensated associates are eligible to
participate. Participants are selected by a committee of the
Board of Directors. Benefits vest after five years of service
and are based on a percentage of average compensation (base
salary plus bonus) for the three highest fiscal years in the
five-year period immediately preceding termination of the
participants full-time employment. As of December 31,
2004, seven executive officers were participants in the Plan.
Our obligations under the Plan are not funded. The Company uses
a November 1 measurement date for the Plan.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Change in benefit obligation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit obligation at beginning of year
|
|
$ |
20,785 |
|
|
$ |
20,266 |
|
Service cost
|
|
|
1,482 |
|
|
|
1,486 |
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
1,288 |
|
|
|
1,353 |
|
Actuarial gain
|
|
|
(3,566 |
) |
|
|
(2,180 |
) |
Benefits paid
|
|
|
(381 |
) |
|
|
(140 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit obligation at end of year
|
|
$ |
19,608 |
|
|
$ |
20,785 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded status:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded status at end of year
|
|
$ |
(19,608 |
) |
|
$ |
(20,785 |
) |
Unrecognized actuarial loss
|
|
|
(1,993 |
) |
|
|
1,572 |
|
Unrecognized prior service cost
|
|
|
1,397 |
|
|
|
1,662 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net amount recognized
|
|
$ |
(20,204 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,551 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued benefit liability
|
|
$ |
(20,204 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,551 |
) |
The accumulated benefit obligation for the Plan was $17,442 and
$17,472 at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Components of net periodic benefit cost:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service cost
|
|
$ |
1,482 |
|
|
$ |
1,486 |
|
|
$ |
881 |
|
Interest cost
|
|
|
1,288 |
|
|
|
1,353 |
|
|
|
1,205 |
|
Amortization of unrecognized prior service cost
|
|
|
264 |
|
|
|
264 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
Recognized net actuarial loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
229 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost
|
|
$ |
3,034 |
|
|
$ |
3,316 |
|
|
$ |
2,407 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-48
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
The weighted-average assumptions used to determine benefit
obligations at December 31, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Discount rate
|
|
|
6.00 |
% |
|
|
6.25 |
% |
Rate of compensation increases
|
|
|
3.00 |
% |
|
|
4.00 |
% |
The weighted-average assumptions used to determine net periodic
benefit cost for the year end December 31, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Discount rate
|
|
|
6.25 |
% |
|
|
6.75 |
% |
Rate of compensation increases
|
|
|
4.00 |
% |
|
|
4.50 |
% |
Corridor
|
|
|
10.00 |
% |
|
|
10.00 |
% |
|
|
|
Payments to Plan Participants |
We expect to pay expected benefit payments of $461 in 2005.
|
|
17. |
Earnings/(loss) per share |
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and
diluted earnings/(loss) per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Numerator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings/(loss) applicable to common shares for basic and
diluted calculation
|
|
$ |
81,847 |
|
|
$ |
3,295 |
|
|
$ |
(44,915 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares
|
|
|
242,469 |
|
|
|
230,710 |
|
|
|
229,593 |
|
|
Effect of dilutive securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock options and warrants
|
|
|
3,697 |
|
|
|
5,739 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator for diluted calculation
|
|
|
246,166 |
|
|
|
236,449 |
|
|
|
229,593 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, the
effect of approximately 4,253.8, 19,710.1 and 40,037.8
respectively, of potentially dilutive common shares for
outstanding stock options, warrants and convertible subordinated
notes and debentures were excluded from the calculation of
diluted earnings/(loss) per share because the effects were
anti-dilutive.
|
|
18. |
Business segments and operations by geographic areas |
Our business consists of delivering products and solutions that
capture, move and manage information in real time to and from
the point of business activity. In addition, we provide customer
support for our products and professional services related to
these products and solutions. These services are coordinated
under one global services organization. As a result, our
activities are conducted in two reportable segments, Products
and Services.
F-49
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
The Products segment sells products and solutions in the forms
of advanced data capture equipment, mobile computing devices,
RFID, wireless communication equipment and other peripheral
products and also receives royalties. The Services segment
provides solutions that connect our data capture equipment and
mobile computing devices to wireless networks. This segment also
provides worldwide comprehensive repair, maintenance,
integration and support in the form of service contracts or
repairs on an as-needed basis. We use many factors to measure
performance and allocate resources to these two reportable
segments. The primary measurements are sales and gross profit.
The accounting policies of the two reportable segments are
essentially the same as those used to prepare our consolidated
financial statements. We rely on our internal management system
to provide us with necessary sales and cost data by reportable
segment, and we make financial decisions and allocate resources
based on the information we receive from this management system.
In the measurement of segment performance, we do not allocate
research and development, sales and marketing, or general and
administrative expenses. We do not use that information to make
key operating decisions and do not believe that allocating these
expenses is significant in evaluating performance.
Beginning January 1, 2004, we revised our internal
reporting of certain manufacturing costs, including but not
limited to costs of re-working product, warranty costs,
obsolescence costs and costs to scrap, and we no longer include
these in our standard costing structure. As reflected in the
table below, there is an increase in our standard gross profit
and our manufacturing variances and other related costs for the
year ended December 31, 2004 as compared to the comparable
period in 2003. There is no change in the overall gross profit
of our segments. The positive impact that this change had on our
year ended December 31, 2004 product division standard
gross profit by geographic region is as follows; the Americas
$45,032, EMEA $19,898 and Asia Pacific $5,464.
Our internal structure is in the form of a matrix organization
whereby certain managers are held responsible for products and
services worldwide while other managers are responsible for
specific geographic areas. The operating results of both
components are reviewed on a regular basis.
We operate in three main geographic regions: The Americas (which
includes North and South America), EMEA (which includes Europe,
Middle East and Africa) and Asia Pacific (which includes Japan,
the Far East and Australia). Sales are allocated to each region
based upon the location of the use of the products and services.
Non-U.S. sales for each of the years ended
December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002 were $703,570, $644,085
and $542,886 respectively.
Identifiable assets are those tangible and intangible assets
used in operations in each geographic region. Corporate assets
are principally goodwill, intangible assets and temporary
investments.
F-50
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
Summarized financial information concerning our reportable
segments and geographic regions is shown in the following table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Products | |
|
Services | |
|
Total | |
|
Products | |
|
Services | |
|
Total | |
|
Products | |
|
Services | |
|
Total | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas(a)
|
|
$ |
921,975 |
|
|
$ |
194,254 |
|
|
$ |
1,116,229 |
|
|
$ |
777,105 |
|
|
$ |
201,994 |
|
|
$ |
979,099 |
|
|
$ |
728,294 |
|
|
$ |
205,876 |
|
|
$ |
934,170 |
|
EMEA
|
|
|
394,747 |
|
|
|
92,474 |
|
|
|
487,221 |
|
|
|
345,983 |
|
|
|
92,632 |
|
|
|
438,615 |
|
|
|
300,130 |
|
|
|
82,716 |
|
|
|
382,846 |
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
116,949 |
|
|
|
11,724 |
|
|
|
128,673 |
|
|
|
100,765 |
|
|
|
11,799 |
|
|
|
112,564 |
|
|
|
74,646 |
|
|
|
9,955 |
|
|
|
84,601 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net sales
|
|
$ |
1,433,671 |
|
|
$ |
298,452 |
|
|
$ |
1,732,123 |
|
|
$ |
1,223,853 |
|
|
$ |
306,425 |
|
|
$ |
1,530,278 |
|
|
$ |
1,103,070 |
|
|
$ |
298,547 |
|
|
$ |
1,401,617 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard gross profit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas
|
|
$ |
506,772 |
|
|
$ |
57,469 |
|
|
$ |
564,241 |
|
|
$ |
405,558 |
|
|
$ |
50,604 |
|
|
$ |
456,162 |
|
|
$ |
348,783 |
|
|
$ |
74,177 |
|
|
$ |
422,960 |
|
EMEA
|
|
|
232,977 |
|
|
|
29,162 |
|
|
|
262,139 |
|
|
|
179,500 |
|
|
|
31,994 |
|
|
|
211,494 |
|
|
|
147,671 |
|
|
|
19,381 |
|
|
|
167,052 |
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
68,579 |
|
|
|
4,637 |
|
|
|
73,216 |
|
|
|
52,059 |
|
|
|
4,605 |
|
|
|
56,664 |
|
|
|
37,957 |
|
|
|
4,395 |
|
|
|
42,352 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross profit at standard
|
|
$ |
808,328 |
|
|
$ |
91,268 |
|
|
$ |
899,596 |
|
|
$ |
637,117 |
|
|
$ |
87,203 |
|
|
|
724,320 |
|
|
$ |
534,411 |
|
|
$ |
97,953 |
|
|
|
632,364 |
|
Manufacturing variances and other related costs
|
|
|
84,624 |
|
|
|
5,934 |
|
|
|
90,558 |
|
|
|
48,367 |
|
|
|
704 |
|
|
|
49,071 |
|
|
|
125,321 |
|
|
|
19,391 |
|
|
|
144,712 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross profit
|
|
$ |
723,704 |
|
|
$ |
85,334 |
|
|
$ |
809,038 |
|
|
$ |
588,750 |
|
|
$ |
86,499 |
|
|
$ |
675,249 |
|
|
$ |
409,090 |
|
|
$ |
78,562 |
|
|
$ |
487,652 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
Included in The Americas are revenues of approximately $87,676,
$92,906, and $75,439 from non-U.S. countries, mainly
Canada, Brazil and Mexico, for the years ended December 31,
2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. |
Below is a summary of product revenues by product division for
the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31, | |
|
|
| |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
2002 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Product Division:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mobile Computing
|
|
$ |
885,469 |
|
|
$ |
755,559 |
|
|
$ |
695,353 |
|
Advanced Data Capture
|
|
|
407,697 |
|
|
|
352,410 |
|
|
|
317,091 |
|
Wireless Infrastructure
|
|
|
150,663 |
|
|
|
128,357 |
|
|
|
103,285 |
|
RFID
|
|
|
5,610 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(15,768 |
) |
|
|
(12,473 |
) |
|
|
(12,659 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,433,671 |
|
|
$ |
1,223,853 |
|
|
$ |
1,103,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other, net represents royalty revenues and rebates which the
Company does not assign to a product division.
F-51
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
notes to consolidated financial
statements (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of | |
|
As of | |
|
|
December 31, | |
|
December 31, | |
|
|
2004 | |
|
2003 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
Identifiable assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Americas
|
|
$ |
915,565 |
|
|
$ |
867,133 |
|
EMEA
|
|
|
322,490 |
|
|
|
316,406 |
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
52,385 |
|
|
|
64,228 |
|
Corporate (principally goodwill, intangible assets and
investments)
|
|
|
639,929 |
|
|
|
398,751 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
1,930,369 |
|
|
$ |
1,646,518 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
19. |
Selected quarterly financial data (unaudited) |
The following tables set forth unaudited quarterly financial
information for the years ended December 31, 2004 and 2003.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31 | |
|
June 30 | |
|
September 30 | |
|
December 31 | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
Year ended December 31, 2004:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
419,651 |
|
|
$ |
432,785 |
|
|
$ |
429,152 |
|
|
$ |
450,535 |
|
Cost of revenue
|
|
|
224,723 |
|
|
|
236,102 |
|
|
|
228,439 |
|
|
|
233,821 |
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
194,928 |
|
|
|
196,683 |
|
|
|
200,713 |
|
|
|
216,714 |
|
Recovery from legal settlements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9,000 |
) |
|
|
(12,400 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
165,473 |
|
|
|
162,017 |
|
|
|
184,454 |
(1) |
|
|
178,134 |
|
Earnings from operations
|
|
|
29,455 |
|
|
|
43,666 |
|
|
|
28,659 |
|
|
|
38,580 |
|
Net earnings
|
|
|
6,828 |
|
|
|
28,771 |
|
|
|
17,791 |
|
|
|
28,457 |
|
Net earnings per common share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.12 |
|
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
|
$ |
0.11 |
|
Year ended December 31, 2003:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
386,347 |
|
|
$ |
373,819 |
|
|
$ |
377,110 |
|
|
$ |
393,002 |
|
Cost of revenue
|
|
|
214,475 |
|
|
|
221,430 |
|
|
|
210,208 |
|
|
|
208,916 |
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
171,872 |
|
|
|
152,389 |
|
|
|
166,902 |
|
|
|
184,086 |
|
Stock based compensation expense
|
|
|
776 |
|
|
|
1,456 |
|
|
|
7,640 |
|
|
|
7,215 |
|
Loss provision for legal settlements
|
|
|
72,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other operating expenses
|
|
|
136,173 |
|
|
|
146,685 |
|
|
|
141,264 |
|
|
|
154,519 |
|
(Loss)/earnings from operations
|
|
|
(37,077 |
) |
|
|
4,248 |
|
|
|
17,998 |
|
|
|
22,352 |
|
Net (loss)/earnings
|
|
|
(31,013 |
) |
|
|
6,615 |
|
|
|
11,519 |
|
|
|
16,174 |
|
Net (loss)/earnings per common
share(2)
:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$ |
(0.13 |
) |
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
Diluted
|
|
$ |
(0.13 |
) |
|
$ |
0.03 |
|
|
$ |
0.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.07 |
|
|
|
(1) |
We wrote off $12,800 of in-process research and development
related to the acquisition of Matrics in the third quarter of
2004. |
|
(2) |
Quarterly earnings per share calculations do not agree to the
year end earnings per share calculation due to rounding. |
F-52
Schedule II
(b) Financial Statements Schedule:
Symbol Technologies, Inc. and Subsidiaries
valuation and qualifying accounts
for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Column A |
|
Column B | |
|
Column C | |
|
Column D | |
|
Column E | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
Additions | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at | |
|
Charged to | |
|
Charged to | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of | |
|
Costs and | |
|
Other | |
|
|
|
Balance at | |
Description |
|
Year | |
|
Expenses | |
|
Accounts | |
|
Deductions | |
|
End of Year | |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
(All amounts in thousands) | |
Allowance for doubtful accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
$ |
13,946 |
|
|
$ |
3,514 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
8,075 |
(a) |
|
$ |
9,385 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
$ |
34,272 |
|
|
$ |
7,564 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
27,890 |
(a) |
|
$ |
13,946 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
$ |
27,168 |
|
|
$ |
15,975 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
8,871 |
(a) |
|
$ |
34,272 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory reserve:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
$ |
109,331 |
|
|
$ |
16,189 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
70,273 |
(b) |
|
$ |
55,247 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
$ |
170,057 |
|
|
$ |
20,132 |
|
|
$ |
863 |
|
|
$ |
81,721 |
(b) |
|
$ |
109,331 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
$ |
211,621 |
|
|
$ |
26,339 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
67,903 |
(b) |
|
$ |
170,057 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax valuation allowance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
$ |
43,936 |
|
|
$ |
(6,981 |
) |
|
$ |
333 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
37,288 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2003
|
|
$ |
31,436 |
|
|
$ |
6,523 |
|
|
$ |
5,977 |
(c) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
43,936 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002
|
|
$ |
8,098 |
|
|
$ |
6,166 |
|
|
$ |
17,172 |
(d) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
31,436 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(a) |
|
Write-off of uncollectible accounts. In 2003, $19,752 related to
Telxon was written off. |
|
(b) |
|
Disposal of obsolete inventory. |
|
(c) |
|
Valuation allowances recorded in goodwill for deferred tax
assets related to acquired businesses. |
|
(d) |
|
Adjustment for true-up for tax rates on Pre-2002 State Net
Operating Losses and valuations allowances recorded in goodwill
for deferred tax assets related to acquired businesses. |
S-1