Back to GetFilings.com



Table of Contents

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

 


 

FORM 10-Q

 


 

(MARK ONE)

x QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For The Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2004

 

¨ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1934

 

For The Transition Period From              To             

 

Commission File No. 000-28715

 


 

NEOFORMA, INC.

(Exact name of the Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

 


 

Delaware   77-0424252

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

 

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification Number)

3061 Zanker Rd., San Jose, CA   95134
(Address of principal executive offices)   (Zip code)

 

(408) 468-4000

(The Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

 


 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

None

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

 

Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value Per Share

 


 

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

 

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  x    No  ¨

 

The number of shares of the Registrant’s common stock outstanding on August 2, 2004 was 20,073,295.

 



Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

          Page

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

   3

ITEM 1.

   Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements:     
     Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of June 30, 2004 and December 31, 2003    3
     Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the Three and Six Months Ended June 30, 2004 and 2003    4
     Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Six Months Ended June 30, 2004 and 2003    5
     Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements    6

ITEM 2.

   Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations    12

ITEM 3.

   Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk    30

ITEM 4.

   Controls and Procedures    30

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

   31

ITEM 1.

   Legal Proceedings    31

ITEM 2.

   Changes in Securities, Use of Proceeds and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities    31

ITEM 3.

   Defaults Upon Senior Securities    31

ITEM 4.

   Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders    31

ITEM 5.

   Other Information    32

ITEM 6.

   Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K    32

SIGNATURE

   33

EXHIBITS

    


Table of Contents

PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION

 

Item 1. Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

 

NEOFORMA, INC.

 

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

 

(in thousands, except per share amounts)

 

(unaudited)

 

     December 31, 2003*

    June 30, 2004

 
Assets                 

Current assets:

                

Cash and cash equivalents

   $ 13,481     $ 20,375  

Short-term investments

     3,138       2,138  

Accounts receivable, net of reserves of $235 and $322 as of December 31, 2003 and June 30, 2004, respectively

     3,776       3,533  

Related party accounts receivable

     456       —    

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

     2,775       2,583  
    


 


Total current assets

     23,626       28,629  

Property and equipment, net

     7,432       9,890  

Intangibles, net

     2,022       1,728  

Goodwill

     1,652       1,652  

Capitalized partnership costs, net

     106,003       75,070  

Non-marketable investments

     83       83  

Restricted cash

     1,020       1,020  

Other assets

     1,376       885  
    


 


Total assets

   $ 143,214     $ 118,957  
    


 


Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity                 

Current liabilities:

                

Accounts payable

   $ 2,727     $ 1,533  

Accrued payroll

     4,199       3,848  

Other accrued liabilities

     3,183       2,734  

Deferred revenue

     2,651       1,922  
    


 


Total current liabilities

     12,760       10,037  

Deferred rent

     657       621  

Deferred revenue, less current portion

     554       468  
    


 


Total liabilities

     13,971       11,126  
    


 


Stockholders’ equity:

                

Preferred stock, $0.001 par value per share:

                

Authorized—5,000 shares, no shares issued and outstanding at December 31, 2003 and June 30, 2004, respectively

     —         —    

Common stock, $0.001 par value per share:

                

Authorized—300,000 shares at December 31, 2003 and June 30, 2004, respectively

                

Issued and outstanding: 18,943 and 19,915 shares at December 31, 2003 and June 30, 2004, respectively

     19       20  

Additional paid-in capital

     827,570       837,288  

Notes receivable from stockholders

     (5,422 )     (203 )

Deferred compensation

     (218 )     (4,940 )

Unrealized gain on available for sale securities

     1       1  

Accumulated deficit

     (692,707 )     (724,335 )
    


 


Total stockholders’ equity

     129,243       107,831  
    


 


Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity

   $ 143,214     $ 118,957  
    


 



* Derived from audited financial statements.

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

3


Table of Contents

NEOFORMA, INC.

 

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

 

(in thousands, except per share amounts)

 

(unaudited)

 

     Three Months Ended
June 30,


   

Six Months Ended

June 30,


 
     2003

    2004

    2003

    2004

 

Revenue:

                                

Related party revenue, net (see Note 3)

   $ —       $ —       $ 539     $ —    

Non-related party revenue

     2,519       3,340       4,582       6,268  
    


 


 


 


Total revenue

     2,519       3,340       5,121       6,268  

Operating expenses:

                                

Cost of services

     1,481       2,682       2,859       4,743  

Operations

     4,799       2,811       9,941       5,809  

Product development

     4,183       4,403       8,926       8,041  

Selling and marketing

     4,633       3,513       9,610       7,169  

General and administrative

     3,130       2,468       6,097       4,706  

Amortization of intangibles

     147       147       294       294  

Amortization of partnership costs (see Note 3)

     833       1,669       833       3,141  

Write-off of stockholder notes receivable

     —         4,115       —         4,115  
    


 


 


 


Total operating expenses

     19,206       21,808       38,560       38,018  
    


 


 


 


Loss from operations

     (16,687 )     (18,468 )     (33,439 )     (31,750 )

Other income/(expense):

                                

Interest income

     80       55       131       124  

Interest expense

     (300 )     (2 )     (574 )     (3 )

Other income/(expense)

     (41 )     1       (117 )     1  
    


 


 


 


Net loss

   $ (16,948 )   $ (18,414 )   $ (33,999 )   $ (31,628 )
    


 


 


 


Net loss per share:

                                

Basic and diluted

   $ (0.94 )   $ (0.95 )   $ (1.91 )   $ (1.65 )
    


 


 


 


Weighted average shares—basic and diluted

     17,985       19,357       17,763       19,213  
    


 


 


 


 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these condensed consolidated financial statements.

 

4


Table of Contents

NEOFORMA, INC.

 

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

 

(in thousands)

 

(unaudited)

 

    

Six Months Ended

June 30,


 
     2003

    2004

 

Cash flows from operating activities:

                

Net loss

   $ (33,999 )   $ (31,628 )

Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:

                

Restricted common stock issued to employees

     10       —    

Provision for doubtful accounts

     141       110  

Accrued interest receivable on notes receivable from stockholders

     (32 )     (11 )

Depreciation and amortization of property and equipment

     7,061       2,483  

Amortization of intangibles

     294       294  

Amortization of partnership costs classified as an operating expense (see Note 3)

     833       3,141  

Amortization of deferred compensation

     1,717       1,666  

Write-off of stockholder notes receivable

     —         4,115  

Change in assets and liabilities:

                

Accounts receivable

     (1,698 )     589  

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

     378       192  

Other assets

     357       491  

Accounts payable

     (1,734 )     (1,194 )

Other accrued liabilities and accrued payroll

     (4,159 )     (797 )

Deferred revenue

     1,039       (815 )

Deferred rent

     21       (36 )

Accrued interest on related party notes payable

     (2,271 )     —    
    


 


Net cash used in operating activities

     (32,042 )     (21,400 )
    


 


Cash flows from investing activities:

                

Purchases of marketable investments

     (2,082 )     (2,890 )

Proceeds from the sale or maturity of marketable investments

     2,005       3,890  

Capitalization of software development costs

     —         (3,236 )

Purchases of property and equipment

     (3,679 )     (1,652 )
    


 


Net cash used in investing activities

     (3,756 )     (3,888 )
    


 


Cash flows from financing activities:

                

Amortization of partnership costs offset against related party revenue (see Note 3)

     34,531       30,937  

Repayments of notes payable

     (3,399 )     —    

Cash received related to options exercised

     380       622  

Proceeds from the issuance of common stock under the employee stock purchase plan

     506       526  

Common stock repurchased, net of notes receivable issued to common stockholders

     (2 )     (177 )

Collections of notes receivable from stockholders

     1,042       274  
    


 


Net cash provided by financing activities

     33,058       32,182  
    


 


Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents

     (2,740 )     6,894  

Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of period

     23,277       13,481  
    


 


Cash and cash equivalents, end of period

   $ 20,537     $ 20,375  
    


 


Supplemental schedule of non-cash investing and financing activities:

                

Issuance of restricted stock to related parties

   $ 5,314     $ 3,145  
    


 


Reduction of deferred compensation resulting from employee terminations

   $ 226     $ 187  
    


 


Issuance of restricted stock to employees and officers

   $ 320     $ 6,649  
    


 


Issuance of common stock in connection with the acquisition of Revelocity Corporation

   $ 1,071     $ —    
    


 


Reduction of amortization of deferred compensation due to capitalization of software development costs

   $ —       $ 53  
    


 


 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

 

5


Table of Contents

NEOFORMA, INC.

 

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

 

1. DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS

 

Neoforma, Inc. (the Company) provides supply chain management solutions for the healthcare industry. The Company utilizes a combination of technology, information and services to help the participants in the healthcare supply chain, principally hospitals, suppliers and group purchasing organizations (GPOs), to reduce operational inefficiencies and lower costs.

 

Since inception, the Company has incurred significant losses and, as of June 30, 2004, had an accumulated deficit of $724.3 million. The Company’s future long-term capital needs will depend significantly on the rate of growth of its business, the timing of its expanded service offerings, the success of these service offerings once they are launched and the Company’s ability to adjust its operating expenses to an appropriate level if the growth rate of its business is slower than it expects. Any projections of future long-term cash needs and cash flows are subject to substantial uncertainty. If available funds and cash generated from operations are insufficient to satisfy its long-term liquidity requirements, the Company may seek to sell additional equity or debt securities, obtain additional lines of credit, curtail expansion of its services, including reductions in its staffing levels and related expenses, or potentially liquidate selected assets. The Company cannot be certain that additional financing will be available on favorable terms if and when required, or at all.

 

The condensed consolidated financial statements included herein have been prepared by the Company, without audit, pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations. These unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and notes should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 filed with the SEC. In the opinion of management, the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments, consisting only of recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of the Company’s financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the periods indicated. The results of operations for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for future quarters or the year ending December 31, 2004.

 

2. RECLASSIFICATIONS

 

Certain reclassifications have been made to the historical unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements to conform to the 2004 presentation. These reclassifications had no impact on the Company’s previously reported financial position, net loss or cash flows.

 

3. REVENUE

 

Application of EITF No. 01-9

 

In November 2001, the Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) reached a consensus on EITF Abstract No. 01-9, “Accounting for Consideration Given by a Vendor to a Customer (Including a Reseller of the Vendor’s Products).” EITF No. 01-9 addresses whether consideration from a vendor to a reseller is (i) an adjustment of the selling prices of the vendor’s products and, therefore, should be classified as an offset against revenue when recognized in the vendor’s statement of operations or (ii) a cost incurred by the vendor for assets or services received from the reseller and, therefore, should be classified as a cost or expense when recognized in the vendor’s statement of operations.

 

On July 26, 2000, the Company issued equity consideration to VHA Inc. and University HealthSystem Consortium (UHC) in connection with the Company’s outsourcing and operating agreement, as amended from time to time (the Outsourcing Agreement), entered into with Novation, LLC, VHA, UHC and Healthcare Purchasing Partners International, LLC (HPPI) on May 24, 2000 (see Note 9). The Company capitalized this consideration when measurement dates occurred. The final measurement date occurred during the quarter ended March 31, 2004. The portion of the consideration that was capitalized at the time of issuance is being amortized over the five-year estimated life of the arrangement. The remaining consideration, which was capitalized as earned, is being amortized over the term of the arrangements that resulted in the consideration being earned, typically two to three years. As a result of the application of EITF No. 01-9, the Company has classified amortization associated with this equity consideration as an offset against gross related party revenue from those parties. This treatment results in non-cash amortization of partnership costs being offset against gross related party revenue up to the lesser of gross related party revenue or amortization of partnership costs in any period. Any amortization of partnership costs in excess of gross related party revenue in any period is classified as an operating expense. The following table

 

6


Table of Contents

summarizes the impact that the application of EITF No. 01-9 had on the Company’s condensed consolidated statements of operations (in thousands):

 

     Three Months Ended
June 30,


   

Six Months Ended

June 30,


 
     2003

    2004

    2003

    2004

 

Revenue:

                                

Gross related party revenue

   $ 17,528     $ 15,459     $ 35,070     $ 30,937  

Offset of amortization of partnership costs

     (17,528 )     (15,459 )     (34,531 )     (30,937 )
    


 


 


 


Total related party revenue, net

   $ —       $ —       $ 539     $ —    
    


 


 


 


Amortization of Partnership Costs:

                                

Amortization of partnership costs

   $ 18,361     $ 17,128     $ 35,364     $ 34,078  

Offset to gross related party revenue

     (17,528 )     (15,459 )     (34,531 )     (30,937 )
    


 


 


 


Total amortization of partnership costs reported as an operating expense

   $ 833     $ 1,669     $ 833     $ 3,141  
    


 


 


 


 

The amortization of partnership costs reported as an operating expense is reflected as an adjustment to reconcile net loss to cash from operating activities in the condensed consolidated statements of cash flows. Under EITF No. 01-9, the Company accounts for the fees paid by Novation under the terms of the Outsourcing Agreement as if they were payments made for the equity consideration provided to VHA and UHC as opposed to payments for services. As a result, the amortization of partnership costs that is offset against gross related party revenue is reported as a cash flow from financing activities in the Company’s condensed consolidated statements of cash flows.

 

Revenue by Customer Category

 

The Company’s principal sources of revenue, by customer category, are (i) healthcare providers and GPOs, (ii) suppliers and (iii) other. Healthcare provider and GPO revenue primarily consists of revenue from hospitals and from GPOs, including from Novation under the Outsourcing Agreement. Supplier revenue includes revenue from both manufacturers and distributors. Other revenue consists of all revenue from entities other than healthcare providers, GPOs and suppliers, including the software license revenue generated by the Company’s August 2001 agreement with Global Healthcare Exchange, LLC (GHX), as well as revenue generated under various agreements whereby the Company is entitled to a share of revenue generated by those entities. Revenue by customer category was as follows:

 

    

Three Months Ended

June 30,


   Six Months Ended
June 30,


     2003

   2004

   2003

   2004

     (in thousands)    (in thousands)

Provider and GPO revenue

   $ 187    $ 732    $ 1,178    $ 1,161

Supplier revenue

     2,026      2,324      3,338      4,524

Other revenue

     306      284      605      583
    

  

  

  

Total

   $ 2,519    $ 3,340    $ 5,121    $ 6,268
    

  

  

  

 

Percentage of Total Revenue

 

     Three Months Ended
June 30,


    Six Months Ended
June 30,


 
     2003

    2004

    2003

    2004

 

Provider and GPO revenue

   7.4 %   21.9 %   23.0 %   18.5 %

Supplier revenue

   80.4     69.6     65.2     72.2  

Other revenue

   12.2     8.5     11.8     9.3  
    

 

 

 

Total

   100.0 %   100.0 %   100.0 %   100.0 %
    

 

 

 

 

4. BASIC AND DILUTED NET LOSS PER SHARE

 

Basic net loss per share is computed using the weighted average number of shares of common stock outstanding. Diluted net loss per share is the same as basic net loss per share for all periods presented because the effect of any potentially dilutive securities is excluded, as the securities are anti-dilutive due to the Company’s net losses in each of these periods. The total number of weighted average common stock equivalents, such as options, warrants and unvested restricted stock, that are excluded from the diluted loss per share calculation was 1.3 million, 1.0 million, 1.4 million and 916,000 shares for the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, and the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, respectively.

 

7


Table of Contents

The following table presents the calculation of basic and diluted net loss per share (in thousands, except per share amounts):

 

     Three Months Ended
June 30,


   

Six Months Ended

June 30,


 
     2003

    2004

    2003

    2004

 

Net loss

   $ (16,948 )   $ (18,414 )   $ (33,999 )   $ (31,628 )
    


 


 


 


Basic and diluted:

                                

Weighted average shares of common stock outstanding

     18,195       19,974       17,941       19,668  

Less: Weighted average shares of unvested restricted common stock grants

     (187 )     (617 )     (141 )     (455 )

Less: Weighted average shares of common stock subject to repurchase

     (23 )     —         (37 )     —    
    


 


 


 


Weighted average shares used in computing basic and diluted net loss per share

     17,985       19,357       17,763       19,213  
    


 


 


 


Basic and diluted net loss per share

   $ (0.94 )   $ (0.95 )   $ (1.91 )   $ (1.65 )
    


 


 


 


 

5. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION

 

At June 30, 2004, the Company had three stock-based employee compensation plans. The Company accounts for these plans under the recognition and measurement principles of Accounting Principles Board Opinion (APB) No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,” and related interpretations. The Company calculated the fair value of each option grant and stock purchase right on the dates of grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model as prescribed by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” using the following assumptions:

 

     Three Months Ended
June 30,


  Six Months Ended
June 30,


     2003

  2004

  2003

  2004

Risk-free interest rate range

   1.0%-4.5%   1.6%-3.8%   1.0%-4.7%   1.0%-3.8%

Expected lives (in years)—options

   5.0   5.0   5.0   5.0

Expected lives (in years)—ESPP

   0.5   0.5   0.5   0.5

Dividend yield

   0%   0%   0%   0%

Volatility

   90%   90%   90%   90%

 

The following table illustrates the effect on net loss and net loss per share if the Company had applied the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 to stock-based employee compensation (in thousands, except per share data):

 

     Three Months Ended
June 30,


   

Six Months Ended

June 30,


 
     2003

    2004

    2003

    2004

 

Net loss as reported

   $ (16,948 )   $ (18,414 )   $ (33,999 )   $ (31,628 )

Add: Stock-based compensation expense included in reported net loss

     1,003       1,199       1,717       1,666  

Less: Total stock-based employee compensation expense determined under fair value based method for all awards

     (3,358 )     (3,442 )     (6,320 )     (6,229 )
    


 


 


 


Net loss, pro forma

   $ (19,303 )   $ (20,657 )   $ (38,602 )   $ (36,191 )
    


 


 


 


Net loss per share, as reported

   $ (0.94 )   $ (0.95 )   $ (1.91 )   $ (1.65 )
    


 


 


 


Net loss per share, pro forma

   $ (1.07 )   $ (1.07 )   $ (2.17 )   $ (1.88 )
    


 


 


 


 

Restricted Stock

 

During the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, in connection with the award of restricted stock to employees and officers, the Company recorded deferred compensation of $0, $61,000, $320,000 and $6.6 million, respectively, representing the fair value of the underlying common stock at the dates of grant. The restrictions on the stock lapse on various dates through May 2006 and are subject to the continuous employment of the employees and officers with the Company through those dates. These amounts are presented as a reduction of stockholders’ equity and are being amortized over the periods from the date of grant through the vesting date on an accelerated basis. Amortization of deferred compensation is reversed for any amounts recognized on shares of restricted stock that do not vest due to employee terminations or employee attrition. During the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, the Company recorded $0, $140,000, $144,000 and $187,000, respectively, in reductions of the deferred compensation as a result of employee terminations and the

 

8


Table of Contents

resulting forfeiture of restricted stock. The Company recorded gross amortization of deferred compensation related to these shares of $503,000, $1.3 million, $1.0 million and $1.7 million during the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, respectively.

 

6. PROPERTY AND EQUIPMENT

 

Property and equipment are stated at cost and are depreciated on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful lives of the assets, ranging from two to four years. Leasehold improvements are amortized, using the straight-line method, over the shorter of the lease term or the useful lives of the improvements. Repairs and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred. When property and equipment is retired or otherwise disposed of, the cost and accumulated depreciation are relieved from the accounts and the net gain or loss is included in the determination of income.

 

Purchased software is capitalized at cost when purchased and amortized over the license period commencing once the software is placed in service. Direct costs to place purchased software into service are capitalized as part of the asset. In accordance with Statement of Position No. 98-1, “Accounting for the Costs of Computer Software Developed or Obtained for Internal Use,” costs incurred to develop software for use in operations are capitalized. Such costs, incurred during the application development stage, include external direct costs of materials and services and internal direct payroll and payroll related costs. During the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, capitalized software development costs related to new functionality for the Company’s solutions offered to its customers.

 

As of December 31, 2003 and June 30, 2004, property and equipment consisted of the following (in thousands):

 

     December 31, 2003

    June 30, 2004

 

Computer and equipment

   $ 14,791     $ 14,412  

Software

     21,361       21,723  

Capitalized software development costs

     —         3,289  

Furniture and fixtures

     1,673       1,673  

Leasehold improvements

     2,393       2,396  
    


 


       40,218       43,493  

Accumulated depreciation and amortization

     (32,786 )     (33,603 )
    


 


Property and equipment, net

   $ 7,432     $ 9,890  
    


 


 

7. WRITE-OFF OF STOCKHOLDER NOTES RECEIVABLE

 

During the three months ended June 30, 2004, the Company wrote off two notes receivable from stockholders, with an aggregate carrying value of $5.0 million, consisting of one note from a former executive officer of the Company and another from a former employee. These notes were issued in connection with the early exercise of employee stock option grants in fiscal 1999 and were collateralized by, among other things, the shares issued upon exercise of the options. Once the notes became due, the Company actively pursued collection using all reasonable efforts to collect the outstanding balances. Upon exhausting all such efforts in June 2004, the Company determined that these two notes were no longer collectible and, as such, the Company reclaimed all shares of common stock collateralizing the notes, totaling 71,250 shares, and wrote off the remaining balances. The fair value of the common stock on the date it was reclaimed by the Company and the resulting net write-off amount were as follows:

 

Carrying value of notes receivable, including accrued interest

   $ 4,955  

Less: Fair market value of reclaimed common stock of the Company

     (840 )
    


Write-off of stockholder notes receivable

   $ 4,115  
    


          

 

As of June 30, 2004, the Company had $203,000 of remaining notes receivable from stockholders outstanding. The remaining notes outstanding consist of several notes due in January 2005 from current and former employees of the Company. The Company intends to vigorously pursue collection on these stockholder notes receivable when and as they become due.

 

8. RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS

 

In April 2004, the EITF issued Statement No. 03-06, “Participating Securities and the Two-Class Method Under FASB Statement No. 128, Earnings Per Share.” EITF No. 03-06 addresses a number of questions regarding the computation of earnings per share by companies that have issued securities other than common stock that contractually entitle the holder to participate in dividends and earnings of the company when, and if, it declares dividends on its common stock. The statement also provides further guidance in applying the two-class method of calculating earnings per share, clarifying what constitutes a participating security and how to apply the two-class method of computing earnings per share once it is determined that a security is participating, including how to allocate undistributed earnings to such a security. EITF No. 03-06 is effective for fiscal periods beginning after June 30, 2004. The Company does not believe that the adoption of this statement will have a material impact on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

 

9


Table of Contents

9. RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

 

In 2000, the Company entered into a 10-year strategic Outsourcing Agreement with VHA, UHC, Novation and HPPI. Under the Outsourcing Agreement, the Company agreed to provide specific functionality to Marketplace@Novation®, Novation’s e-commerce marketplace. Novation agreed to act as the Company’s exclusive agent to negotiate agreements with suppliers to offer their equipment, products, supplies and services through marketplaces sponsored by Novation or HPPI, including Marketplace@Novation. VHA, UHC, HPPI and Novation each agreed not to develop or promote any other Internet-based exchange for the acquisition or disposal of products, supplies, equipment or services by healthcare provider organizations.

 

In July 2000, in connection with the Outsourcing Agreement, the Company issued 4.6 million and 1.1 million shares of its common stock to VHA and UHC, respectively. The Company also issued warrants to VHA and UHC, allowing VHA and UHC the opportunity to earn up to 3.1 million and 752,000 additional shares of the Company’s common stock, respectively, over a four-year period by meeting specified performance targets. These performance targets were based upon the historical purchasing volume of VHA and UHC member healthcare organizations that signed up to use Marketplace@Novation. In October 2000, the Company exchanged VHA’s warrant for 3.1 million restricted shares of the Company’s common stock and, in January 2001, the Company exchanged the unexercised portion of UHC’s performance warrant to purchase 564,000 shares of the Company’s common stock for 564,000 restricted shares of the Company’s common stock. VHA and UHC have earned all of the restricted shares. If the performance targets had not been met, VHA’s and UHC’s restricted shares would have been subject to forfeiture.

 

The Company has amended and restated the Outsourcing Agreement from time to time. Under the current agreement, the Fourth Amended and Restated Outsourcing and Operating Agreement (Fourth Amended Agreement), effective August 2003:

 

  the Company and Novation have agreed to a fee level that is based on the percentage of marketplace volume, including supply chain data captured for Marketplace@Novation user purchases but not facilitated by the Company’s connectivity solution. This fee level is determined based on a tiered fee structure under which the incremental fee per dollar of marketplace volume decreases as the marketplace volume increases;

 

  the payments Novation is required to make under the fee level provision are subject to quarterly maximums. During 2003, the Company generated sufficient marketplace volume to earn the quarterly maximum payments, which totaled $69.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2003. Beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2004, the quarterly maximum payment became $15.25 million in each quarter through the expiration of the initial term of the Fourth Amended Agreement in March 2010. Under previous versions of the Outsourcing Agreement, the quarterly maximums were dependent on revenue generated by Novation;

 

  the Company agreed to share revenue with Novation in certain instances, including revenue related to the distribution or licensing of software and other technology solutions. To date, no such revenue sharing has been triggered;

 

  Novation’s rights to view data from any customer are restricted to data from Novation and HPPI sponsored marketplaces only;

 

  the Company has primary responsibility for recruiting, contracting and managing relationships with suppliers regarding their use of supply chain solutions through Marketplace@Novation; and

 

  the Company must continue to meet detailed service level and functionality requirements, including new and enhanced functionality, for Marketplace@Novation.

 

During the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, the fees paid to the Company by Novation totaled $18.0 million, $15.3 million, $36.0 million and $30.5 million, respectively. The fees paid to the Company by Novation in each of the last eight quarters, including the quarter ended June 30, 2004, were limited by the quarterly maximums in those periods. Based on the levels of marketplace volume the Company is currently achieving, the Company expects that the fees it earns from Novation will continue to be limited by the quarterly maximums, above which additional volume will not result in increased fees.

 

10


Table of Contents

10. CONTINGENCIES

 

Litigation

 

In July 2001, the Company, along with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Bear Stearns and FleetBoston Robertson Stephens (certain of the underwriters of the Company’s initial public offering (IPO)), as well as the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Robert Zollars, and its former Chief Financial Officer, Frederick Ruegsegger, were named as defendants in two securities class action lawsuits filed in federal court in the Southern District of New York (No. 01 CV 6689 and No. 01 CV 6712) on behalf of those who purchased shares of the Company’s common stock from January 24, 2000 to December 6, 2000. These actions have since been consolidated, and a consolidated amended complaint was filed in the Southern District of New York on April 24, 2002. The amended complaint alleges that the underwriters solicited and received “undisclosed compensation” from investors in exchange for allocations of stock in the Company’s IPO, and that some investors in the IPO allegedly agreed with the underwriters to buy additional shares in the aftermarket to artificially inflate the price of the Company’s stock. The Company and Messrs. Zollars and Ruegsegger are named in the suits pursuant to Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, for allegedly failing to disclose in the Company’s IPO registration statement and prospectus that the underwriters had entered into the arrangements described above. The complaints seek unspecified damages. Approximately 300 other issuers and their underwriters have had similar suits filed against them, all of which are included in a single coordinated proceeding in the Southern District of New York. On July 1, 2002, the underwriter defendants moved to dismiss all of the IPO allocation litigation complaints against them, including the action involving the Company. On July 15, 2002, the Company, along with the other non-underwriter defendants in the coordinated cases, also moved to dismiss the litigation. Those motions were fully briefed on September 13 and September 27, 2002, respectively, and in February 2003, the Court denied the Company’s motion to dismiss. On October 9, 2002, all of the individual defendants, including Mr. Zollars and Mr. Ruegsegger, were dismissed from the action without prejudice. On June 30, 2003, the Company’s board of directors approved a proposed settlement for this matter, which is part of a larger global settlement between the issuers and plaintiffs. The acceptance of the settlement by the plaintiffs is contingent on a number of factors, including the percentage of issuers who approve the proposed settlement. The Company has agreed to undertake other responsibilities under the proposed settlement, including agreeing to assign away, not assert, or release certain potential claims the Company may have against its underwriters. Any direct financial impact of the proposed settlement is expected to be borne by the Company’s insurers. In June 2004, an agreement of settlement was submitted to the court for preliminary approval. The Company is unable to determine whether or when the settlement will be approved or finalized. Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation however, the Company cannot accurately predict the ultimate outcome of the lawsuits.

 

FIN 45

 

In the normal course of business to facilitate sales of its products, the Company indemnifies other parties, including customers and parties to other transactions with the Company, with respect to certain matters. The Company has agreed to hold the other party harmless against losses arising from a breach of representations or covenants, or out of intellectual property infringement or other claims made against them. These agreements may limit the time within which an indemnification claim can be made and the amount of the claim. In addition, the Company has entered into indemnification agreements with its officers and directors, and the Company’s bylaws contain similar indemnification obligations to the Company’s agents.

 

It is not possible to determine the Company’s maximum potential liability under these indemnification agreements due to the limited history of prior indemnification claims and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. Historically, the Company has not made any payments under these agreements.

 

11


Table of Contents

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

 

Forward-Looking Statements

 

This Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations section should be read in conjunction with the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and related notes appearing elsewhere in this report. This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In many cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “potential,” “intend” or “continue,” or comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements include our expectations about our operating results and strategic relationships. Our actual results may differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of many factors, including, but not limited to, those presented below under the caption “Factors That May Affect Future Operating Results” and elsewhere in this report. We undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statements for any reason, except as required by law, even if new information becomes available or other events occur in the future.

 

Company Background

 

We are a leading provider of supply chain management solutions for the healthcare industry. Through a combination of technology, information and services, our Web-based supply chain management solutions are designed to enable efficient collaboration among hospitals and suppliers, helping them to reduce operational inefficiencies and lower costs. The healthcare supply chain has a number of characteristics, including its large size, high degree of fragmentation, reliance on disparate technologies, dependence on manual processes and highly complex pricing structures, which have led to major inefficiencies. These inefficiencies lead to slower, error-prone transactions and increased overhead and costs for suppliers and hospitals. In addition, the participants in the healthcare industry are under significant competitive and cost pressures and are seeking ways to increase efficiencies in their supply chain to improve their overall margins. Our Web-based solutions make it easier for the participants in the healthcare supply chain, principally hospitals, suppliers and group purchasing organizations, or GPOs, to improve communication, receive comprehensive and accurate information, improve day-to-day operations, accelerate order and contract implementations, enhance strategic planning and gain organization-wide visibility into supply chain activities. Using our solutions, these organizations can improve efficiencies, increase revenue, reduce costs and improve capital allocation.

 

Strategic Relationships

 

In 2000, we entered into a 10-year strategic outsourcing and operating agreement, or Outsourcing Agreement, with VHA Inc., University HealthSystem Consortium, or UHC, Novation, LLC and Healthcare Purchasing Partners International, LLC, or HPPI. Under the Outsourcing Agreement, we agreed to provide specific functionality to Marketplace@Novation, Novation’s e-commerce marketplace. Novation agreed to act as our exclusive agent to negotiate agreements with suppliers to offer their equipment, products, supplies and services through marketplaces sponsored by Novation or HPPI, including Marketplace@Novation. VHA, UHC, HPPI and Novation each agreed not to develop or promote any other Internet-based exchange for the acquisition or disposal of products, supplies, equipment or services by healthcare provider organizations.

 

In July 2000, in connection with the Outsourcing Agreement, we issued 4.6 million and 1.1 million shares of our common stock to VHA and UHC, respectively. We also issued warrants to VHA and UHC, allowing VHA and UHC the opportunity to earn up to 3.1 million and 752,000 additional shares of our common stock, respectively, over a four-year period by meeting specified performance targets. These performance targets were based upon the historical purchasing volume of VHA and UHC member healthcare organizations that signed up to use Marketplace@Novation. In October 2000, we exchanged VHA’s warrant for 3.1 million restricted shares of our common stock and, in January 2001, we exchanged the unexercised portion of UHC’s performance warrant to purchase 564,000 shares of our common stock for 564,000 restricted shares of our common stock. VHA and UHC have earned all of the restricted shares. If the performance targets had not been met, VHA’s and UHC’s restricted shares would have been subject to forfeiture.

 

We have amended and restated the Outsourcing Agreement from time to time. Under the current agreement, the Fourth Amended and Restated Outsourcing and Operating Agreement, or Fourth Amended Agreement, effective August 2003:

 

  we and Novation have agreed to a fee level that is based on the percentage of marketplace volume, including supply chain data captured for Marketplace@Novation user purchases but not facilitated by our connectivity solution. This fee level is determined based on a tiered fee structure under which the incremental fee per dollar of marketplace volume decreases as the marketplace volume increases;

 

  the payments Novation is required to make under the fee level provision are subject to quarterly maximums. During 2003, we generated sufficient marketplace volume to earn the quarterly maximum payments, which totaled $69.2 million for the

 

12


Table of Contents

year ended December 31, 2003. Beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2004, the quarterly maximum payment became $15.25 million in each quarter through the expiration of the initial term of the Fourth Amended Agreement in March 2010. Under previous versions of the Outsourcing Agreement, the quarterly maximums were dependent on revenue generated by Novation;

 

  we agreed to share revenue with Novation in certain instances, including revenue related to the distribution or licensing of software and other technology solutions. To date, no such revenue sharing has been triggered and we do not expect to share any revenue in the foreseeable future;

 

  Novation’s rights to view data from any customer are restricted to data from Novation and HPPI sponsored marketplaces only;

 

  we have primary responsibility for recruiting, contracting and managing relationships with suppliers regarding their use of supply chain solutions through Marketplace@Novation and sole responsibility for generating revenue from those suppliers; and

 

  we must continue to meet detailed service level and functionality requirements, including new and enhanced functionality, for Marketplace@Novation.

 

During the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, the fees paid to us by Novation totaled $18.0 million, $15.3 million, $36.0 million and $30.5 million, respectively. The fees paid to us by Novation in each of the last eight quarters, including the quarter ended June 30, 2004, were limited by the quarterly maximums in those periods. Based on the levels of marketplace volume we are currently achieving, we expect that the fees we earn from Novation will continue to be limited by the quarterly maximums, above which additional volume will not result in increased fees. As a result, we expect to receive $61.0 million in fees from Novation in 2004.

 

Other Matters

 

Since inception, we have incurred significant losses and, as of June 30, 2004, had an accumulated deficit of $724.3 million. We have a limited operating history on which to base an evaluation of our business and prospects. You must consider our prospects in light of the risks, expenses and difficulties frequently encountered by companies in the early stages of development, particularly companies in new and rapidly evolving markets such as the market for Web-based supply chain management solutions for the healthcare industry. To address these risks, we must, among other things, expand our customer base, enter into new strategic alliances, increase the functionality of our solutions, implement and successfully execute our business and marketing strategy, respond to competitive developments and attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel. We may not be successful in addressing these risks, and our failure to do so could seriously harm our business.

 

Results of Operations

 

Overview

 

In the six months ended June 30, 2004 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2003, our total revenue increased 22%, from $5.1 million to $6.3 million. Over the same period, our net loss decreased 7%, from $34.0 million to $31.6 million.

 

Under the terms of the Fourth Amended Agreement, the quarterly maximum limits on the payments we receive from Novation decreased from an annual total of $69.2 million in 2003 to $61.0 million in 2004. As a result of this decrease, and because we achieved the quarterly maximum payments from Novation in both the first and second quarters of 2003 and 2004, our gross related party revenue, prior to the offset by amortization of partnership costs under the application of EITF No. 01-9, decreased from $35.1 million in the six months ended June 30, 2003 to $30.9 million in the six months ended June 30, 2004. However, as a result of the application of EITF No. 01-9, under which we offset gross related party revenue by amortization of partnership costs, we eliminated 98% and 100% of gross related party revenue in the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, respectively (see Note 3 to the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the impact of the application of EITF No. 01-9). Based on the levels of marketplace volume we are currently achieving, we expect the fees we earn from Novation will continue to be limited to the quarterly maximums. As a result, and based on the decline in the quarterly maximums, we expect to generate lower gross related party revenue in 2004 as compared to 2003. There are no further decreases in the Novation payments scheduled, as beginning in fiscal 2004, the maximum payment became $15.3 million per quarter through the expiration of the initial term of the Fourth Amended Agreement in March 2010.

 

Because of the impact of EITF No. 01-9 on our gross related party revenue, our revenue growth has been primarily a result of increases in non-related party revenue. For the six months ended June 30, 2003 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2004,

 

13


Table of Contents

this growth in non-related party revenue was primarily due to increases in revenue from solutions we sell to suppliers and from sales of Neoforma Data Management Solution, or Neoforma DMS, to hospitals. In the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, Global Healthcare Exchange, LLC, or GHX, represented 11% and 9%, respectively, of our total revenue. The revenue from GHX relates to a $3.5 million technology license sold to GHX in 2001, which we have been recognizing ratably over the three-year term of the related operating agreement. Since the inception of our agreement with GHX, ratable recognition of this technology license revenue has accounted for $282,000 of revenue on a quarterly basis. In August 2004, this license revenue will be fully recognized and, as such, our revenue related to this agreement will be lower in the second half of fiscal 2004 as compared to the first half, and we will recognize no revenue related to this agreement after August 2004. We expect this resulting reduction in revenue to be offset by growth in our other revenue streams in the second half of 2004.

 

In 2004 as compared to 2003, we expect our total revenue to continue to grow as a result of increases in non-related party revenue from sales of our solutions to hospital, GPO and supplier customers. In addition, we expect that the fees we generate in connection with the Fourth Amended Agreement in 2004 will be fully offset by amortization of partnership costs, resulting in zero net related party revenue during the year.

 

In the six months ended June 30, 2004 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2003, our total operating expenses decreased 1.4%, from $38.6 million to $38.0 million. The decrease in total operating expenses over this period was primarily a result of a $4.6 million decrease in depreciation and amortization of property and equipment and the capitalization of $3.3 million of internal use software development costs, which were partially offset by a $4.1 million write-off of stockholder notes receivable and a $2.3 million increase in amortization of partnership costs. In addition to the impact of these changes, we experienced an increase in cost of services and decreases in our other operating expenses including operations, product development, selling and marketing and general and administrative expenses.

 

In 2004, although we are making and expect to continue to make investments to support our anticipated growth, we expect total operating expenses to be approximately equal to those incurred in 2003. We expect decreases in operations and selling and marketing expenses will be offset by the write-off of stockholder notes receivable and increases in amortization of partnership costs classified as an operating expense and amortization of deferred compensation, which is reflected within certain of our operating expense categories. The expected reduction in operations expense is the result of less depreciation related to certain large software licenses acquired in 2000 that were fully depreciated as of December 31, 2003. The expected decrease in selling and marketing expenses is primarily due to the decrease in headcount in 2004 as compared to 2003 in these groups. The increase in amortization of partnership costs classified as an operating expense is the result of the anticipated decrease in gross related party revenue as a result of the scheduled decrease in our payments from Novation, which will result in a decrease in the amount of the offset against gross related party revenue. The expected increase in amortization of deferred compensation is the result of company-wide grants of restricted stock issued in February 2004 and the resulting $6.6 million in deferred compensation recorded on the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet during the six months ended June 30, 2004. Of the remaining total deferred compensation of $4.9 million at June 30, 2004, we expect $2.4 million to be amortized during the remainder of fiscal 2004. In addition, although the variance in our total product development expenses from the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 as compared to the same periods in 2003 was nominal, there were significant fluctuations within this expense category in these periods. In future periods, we may have greater fluctuations in product development expense based on the amount and nature of our development work and the costs that require capitalization.

 

14


Table of Contents
    

Three Months Ended

June 30,


       
     2003

    2004

   

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


 
     (in thousands, except per share data)        

Revenue:

                      

Related party revenue, net

   $ —       $ —       —    

Non-related party revenue

     2,519       3,340     32.6 %
    


 


     

Total revenue

     2,519       3,340     32.6 %

Operating expenses:

                      

Cost of services

     1,481       2,682     81.1 %

Operations

     4,799       2,811     (41.4 )%

Product development

     4,183       4,403     5.3 %

Selling and marketing

     4,633       3,513     (24.2 )%

General and administrative

     3,130       2,468     (21.2 )%

Amortization of intangibles

     147       147     —    

Amortization of partnership costs

     833       1,669     100.4 %

Write-off of stockholder notes receivable

     —         4,115     *    
    


 


     

Total operating expenses

     19,206       21,808     13.5 %
    


 


     

Loss from operations

     (16,687 )     (18,468 )   10.7 %

Other income/(expense):

                      

Interest income

     80       55     (31.3 )%

Interest expense

     (300 )     (2 )   (99.3 )%

Other income/(expense)

     (41 )     1     *    
    


 


     

Net loss

   $ (16,948 )   $ (18,414 )   8.6 %
    


 


     

Net loss per share:

                      

Basic and diluted

   $ (0.94 )   $ (0.95 )   1.1 %
    


 


     

Weighted average shares—basic and diluted

     17,985       19,357     7.6 %
    


 


     

 

    

Six Months Ended

June 30,


       
     2003

    2004

   

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


 
     (in thousands, except per share data)        

Revenue:

                      

Related party revenue, net

   $ 539     $ —       (100.0 )%

Non-related party revenue

     4,582       6,268     36.8 %
    


 


     

Total revenue

     5,121       6,268     22.4 %

Operating expenses:

                      

Cost of services

     2,859       4,743     65.9 %

Operations

     9,941       5,809     (41.6 )%

Product development

     8,926       8,041     (9.9 )%

Selling and marketing

     9,610       7,169     (25.4 )%

General and administrative

     6,097       4,706     (22.8 )%

Amortization of intangibles

     294       294     —    

Amortization of partnership costs

     833       3,141     277.1 %

Write-off of stockholder notes receivable

     —         4,115     *    
    


 


     

Total operating expenses

     38,560       38,018     (1.4 )%
    


 


     

Loss from operations

     (33,439 )     (31,750 )   (5.1 )%

Other income/(expense):

                      

Interest income

     131       124     5.3 %

Interest expense

     (574 )     (3 )   (99.5 )%

Other income/(expense)

     (117 )     1     *    
    


 


     

Net loss

   $ (33,999 )   $ (31,628 )   (7.0 )%
    


 


 

Net loss per share:

                      

Basic and diluted

   $ (1.91 )   $ (1.65 )   (13.6 )%
    


 


 

Weighted average shares—basic and diluted

     17,763       19,213     8.2 %
    


 


 


* Not meaningful

 

15


Table of Contents

Three and Six Months Ended June 30, 2003 as Compared to the Three and Six Months Ended June 30, 2004

 

Revenue

 

    

Three Months Ended

June 30,


  

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


   

Six Months Ended

June 30,


  

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


 
     2003

   2004

         2003

   2004

      
     (in thousands)          (in thousands)       

Related party revenue, net

   $ —      $ —      —       $ 539    $ —      (100.0 )%

Non-related party revenue

     2,519      3,340    32.6 %     4,582      6,268    36.8 %
    

  

        

  

      

Total

   $ 2,519    $ 3,340    32.6 %   $ 5,121    $ 6,268    22.4 %
    

  

        

  

      

 

Effective with our fourth quarter and full year 2003 financial results, we reclassified our revenue presentation on our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations to reflect revenue in two categories: related party revenue, net and non-related party revenue.

 

Related Party Revenue. Gross related party revenue consists of fees paid by Novation under the fee level provisions of the Outsourcing Agreement, as amended, and hospital implementation fees earned by us when VHA and UHC member hospitals that have contracted with us are connected to Marketplace@Novation. As a result of the adoption of EITF No. 01-9, amortization of partnership costs resulting from the equity consideration issued to VHA and UHC, the owners of Novation, is classified as an offset against gross related party revenue, as opposed to being classified as an operating expense, up to the lesser of gross related party revenue or gross amortization of partnership costs in any given period. This offset of gross amortization of partnership costs against gross related party revenue results in net related party revenue. For the three months ended June 30, 2003, gross related party revenue of $17.5 million was less than the gross amortization of partnership costs of $18.4 million. For the three months ended March 31, 2003, gross related party revenue of $17.5 million exceeded the gross amortization of partnership costs of $17.0 million, resulting in $539,000 of net related party revenue. As a result, net related party revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2003 was $539,000. For the three and six months ended June 30, 2004, gross related party revenue was $15.5 million and $30.9 million, respectively, which were both less than the gross amortization of partnership costs during the same periods of $17.1 million and $34.1 million, respectively. As a result, there was no net related party revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004. See Note 3 to the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the impact of the application of EITF No. 01-9. During the remaining term of the Fourth Amended Agreement, the quarterly maximums on the fees we may earn from Novation total $61.0 million per year. As we expect gross amortization of partnership costs to be in excess of $61.0 million in 2004, we expect net related party revenue to be $0 in the remainder of 2004.

 

Non-Related Party Revenue. Non-related party revenue includes revenue earned from non-related party healthcare providers, GPOs and suppliers, including revenue from solutions sold to VHA and UHC member hospitals outside the scope of the Fourth Amended Agreement or previous versions of the agreement. The increase in non-related party revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 as compared to the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 was primarily due to increases in revenue generated from providers and GPOs and suppliers. Non-related party revenue by customer category was as follows:

 

    

Three Months Ended

June 30,


  

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


   

Six Months Ended

June 30,


  

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


 
     2003

   2004

         2003

   2004

      
     (in thousands)          (in thousands)       

Non-related party revenue:

                                        

Provider and GPO revenue

   $ 187    $ 732    291.4 %   $ 639    $ 1,161    82.0 %

Supplier revenue

     2,026      2,324    14.7 %     3,338      4,524    35.5 %

Other revenue

     306      284    (7.2 )%     605      583    (3.6 )%
    

  

        

  

      

Total

   $ 2,519    $ 3,340    32.6 %   $ 4,582    $ 6,268    36.8 %
    

  

        

  

      

 

The increase in non-related party revenue from providers and GPOs during the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 as compared to the same periods in 2003 was primarily due to an increase in revenue related to our data cleansing services, which are part of Neoforma DMS for providers and GPOs. We expect our non-related party revenue from providers and GPOs to generally continue to increase in future periods.

 

16


Table of Contents

The increase in non-related party revenue from suppliers during the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 as compared to the same periods in 2003 was a result of increases in revenue related to suppliers’ participation in Marketplace@Novation, including our connectivity services provided as part of Neoforma Order Management Solution, or Neoforma OMS, and our market intelligence offerings for medical-surgical and pharmaceutical suppliers, part of Neoforma DMS. These increases were a result of suppliers’ greater acceptance of Neoforma OMS and Neoforma DMS, and were partially offset by a decrease in revenue related to Neoforma Materials Management Solution, or Neoforma MMS, for suppliers. Neoforma MMS revenue from suppliers declined as a result of a large license sale to a single supplier that occurred in the six months ended June 30, 2003. During the three months ended June 30, 2004, a single Neoforma OMS customer accounted for 10.8% of our non-related party supplier revenue. We expect that revenue generated from this customer will decrease in future periods because the agreement previously in place with this customer terminated in May 2004 and a new agreement is being negotiated at a lower fee. Despite the expected decrease from this single customer relationship, we expect that our non-related party revenue from suppliers generally will continue to increase.

 

The decrease in other non-related party revenue primarily related to the expiration of one of our revenue sharing agreements that we had entered into in connection with the divestiture of one of our former lines of business. We expect other non-related party revenue to continue to decrease in the second half of 2004 largely as a result of the reduction in revenue from GHX. We have been recognizing this revenue ratably over the three-year term of the related operating agreement and, as such, this revenue will be fully recognized by August 2004. Since the inception of our agreement with GHX, ratable recognition of this technology license revenue has accounted for $282,000 of other non-related party revenue on a quarterly basis.

 

Operating Expenses

 

Cost of Services

 

    

Three Months Ended

June 30,


  

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


   

Six Months Ended

June 30,


   Percentage Change
2003 to 2004


 
     2003

   2004

         2003

   2004

      
     (in thousands)          (in thousands)       

Cost of Services

   $ 1,481    $ 2,682    81.1 %   $ 2,859    $ 4,743    65.9 %

 

Cost of services consists primarily of expenses related to hospital and supplier implementation activities and Neoforma DMS services for hospitals and GPOs, as well as direct costs to obtain data for our solutions. These expenditures consist primarily of technology costs, software licenses, salaries and other personnel expenses for our services personnel and fees for independent contractors, consultants and companies to which we outsource services. The increase in cost of services from the three months ended June 30, 2003 to the three months ended June 30, 2004 was primarily due to a $519,000 increase in payroll and related expenses, driven by an increase in headcount in the cost of services group from 27 as of June 30, 2003 to 48 as of June 30, 2004, a $310,000 increase in costs related to outsourced services for certain Neoforma DMS projects that were completed during the periods and a $300,000 increase in costs allocated to cost of services, including depreciation expense and deferred compensation expense. The increase in cost of services from the six months ended June 30, 2003 to the six months ended June 30, 2004 was primarily due to a $1.0 million increase in payroll and related expenses, a $525,000 increase in costs allocated to cost of services, including depreciation expense and deferred compensation expense, and a $179,000 increase in costs related to outsourced services for certain Neoforma DMS projects that were completed during the periods.

 

Operations

 

    

Three Months Ended

June 30,


  

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


    Six Months Ended
June 30,


   Percentage Change
2003 to 2004


 
     2003

   2004

         2003

   2004

      
     (in thousands)          (in thousands)       

Operations

   $ 4,799    $ 2,811    (41.4 )%   $ 9,941    $ 5,809    (41.6 )%

 

Operations expenses consist primarily of expenditures for the operation and maintenance of our technology infrastructure, including customer service. These expenditures consist primarily of technology costs, software licenses, salaries and other personnel expenses for our operations personnel and fees paid to independent contractors and consultants. The decrease in operations expenses from the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 as compared to the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 was primarily due to a $2.0 million and a $4.4 million decrease, respectively, in depreciation expense allocated to operations as a result of certain large software licenses acquired in 2000 that were fully depreciated as of December 31, 2003.

 

17


Table of Contents

Product Development

 

    

Three Months Ended

June 30,


   Percentage Change
2003 to 2004


   

Six Months Ended

June 30,


  

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


 
     2003

   2004

         2003

   2004

      
     (in thousands)          (in thousands)       

Product Development

   $ 4,183    $ 4,403    5.3 %   $ 8,926    $ 8,041    (9.9 )%

 

Product development expenses consist primarily of personnel expenses, fees to consultants and contractors and technology costs associated with the maintenance, development and enhancement of our solutions. The increase in product development expenses from the three months ended June 30, 2003 to the three months ended June 30, 2004 primarily related to a $1.0 million increase in consultant and contractor expenses and a $364,000 increase in payroll and related expenses driven by an increase in headcount in the product development group from 61 as of June 30, 2003 to 75 as of June 30, 2004. Additionally, there was a $258,000 increase in software and hardware maintenance and hosting costs and costs allocated to product development, including depreciation expense and deferred compensation expense. These increases were offset by the capitalization of $1.5 million of product development costs related to development efforts on internal use software in the second quarter of 2004. The decrease in product development expenses from the six months ended June 30, 2003 to the six months ended June 30, 2004 primarily related to the capitalization of certain internal use software development costs of $3.3 million in the first half of 2004, which was partially offset by a $1.6 million increase in consultant and contractor expenses, a $556,000 increase in payroll and related expenses and a $282,000 increase in software and hardware maintenance and hosting costs. Prior to 2004, neither the qualifying internal costs incurred to develop software for use in operations, nor the useful lives of the software developed, were material and, accordingly, such costs were expensed as incurred.

 

Selling and Marketing

 

    

Three Months Ended

June 30,


  

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


   

Six Months Ended

June 30,


  

Percentage Change

2003 to 2004


 
     2003

   2004

         2003

   2004

      
     (in thousands)          (in thousands)       

Selling and Marketing

   $ 4,633    $ 3,513    (24.2 )%   $ 9,610    $ 7,169    (25.4 )%

 

Selling and marketing expenses consist primarily of salaries and commissions for sales and marketing personnel, as well as advertising, promotions and other related marketing costs. The decrease in selling and marketing expenses for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 as compared to the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 related primarily to a decrease in payroll and related expenses of $705,000 and $1.3 million, respectively, largely driven by a decrease in headcount in the selling and marketing groups from 67 as of June 30, 2003 to 48 as of June 30, 2004. Additionally, significant marketing efforts in the first half of 2003, which included updating our corporate image, resulted in increased costs of $138,000 and $490,000, respectively, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 as compared to the three and six months ended June 30, 2004. There was also a decrease of $325,000 and $602,000, respectively, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 as compared to the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 in costs allocated to selling and marketing, including depreciation expense and deferred compensation expense.

 

General and Administrative

 

     Three Months Ended
June 30,


   Percentage Change
2003 to 2004


    Six Months Ended
June 30,


   Percentage Change
2003 to 2004


 
     2003

   2004

         2003

   2004

      
     (in thousands)          (in thousands)       

General and Administrative

   $ 3,130    $ 2,468    (21.2 )%   $ 6,097    $ 4,706    (22.8 )%

 

General and administrative expenses consist of expenses for executive and administrative personnel, facilities, professional services and other general corporate activities. General and administrative expenses decreased for the three months ended June 30, 2004 as compared to the three months ended June 30, 2003 due primarily to a $301,000 reduction in payroll and related expenses and a $235,000 reduction in amortization of deferred compensation related to general and administrative personnel. General and administrative expenses decreased for the six months ended June 30, 2004 as compared to the six months ended June 30, 2003 due primarily to a $714,000 reduction in payroll and related expenses, a $439,000 reduction in amortization of deferred compensation related to general and administrative personnel and a $179,000 decrease in depreciation expense allocated to general and administrative expenses.

 

18


Table of Contents

Amortization of Partnership Costs

 

     Three Months Ended
June 30,


    Percentage Change
2003 to 2004


   

Six Months Ended

June 30,


    Percentage Change
2003 to 2004


 
     2003

    2004

          2003

    2004

       
     (in thousands)           (in thousands)        

Gross Amortization of Partnership Costs

   $ 18,361     $ 17,128     (6.7 )%   $ 35,364     $ 34,078     (3.6 )%

Amortization of Partnership Costs Offset Against Gross Related Party Revenue

     (17,528 )     (15,459 )   (11.8 )%     (34,531 )     (30,937 )   (10.4 )%
    


 


       


 


     

Amortization of Partnership Costs Classified as an Operating Expense

   $ 833     $ 1,669     100.4 %   $ 833     $ 3,141     277.1 %
    


 


       


 


     

 

Amortization of partnership costs represents the amortization of the shares of our common stock issued to VHA and UHC. As of June 30, 2004, capitalized partnership costs represented the capitalized valuation of common stock and earned restricted common stock issued to VHA and UHC in connection with our entering into the Outsourcing Agreement with those entities and with Novation. The value of the initial common stock issued is being amortized over a five-year estimated useful life. The restricted common stock was being valued, and the related valuation was being capitalized, as the shares were earned. VHA and UHC have earned all of the shares of restricted stock. The capitalized partnership costs relating to the restricted common stock are being amortized over the term of the agreement with the healthcare organizations that resulted in the shares being earned, generally three years.

 

The increase in amortization of partnership costs classified as an operating expense from the three and six months ended June 30, 2003 to the three and six months ended June 30, 2004 was largely the result of the scheduled decrease in fees received from Novation, as under EITF No. 01-9, amortization of partnership costs is classified as an offset against gross related party revenue, as opposed to being classified as an operating expense, up to the lesser of gross related party revenue or amortization of partnership costs in any given period.

 

The amortization of partnership costs reported as an operating expense is reflected as an adjustment to reconcile net loss to cash from operating activities in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. Under EITF No. 01-9, we account for the fees being paid by Novation under the terms of the Outsourcing Agreement as if they were payments made for the equity consideration we provided to VHA and UHC as opposed to payments for services. As a result, the amortization of partnership costs that is offset against gross related party revenue is reported as a cash flow from financing activities in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

 

We expect the total gross amortization of partnership costs, prior to the offset under EITF No. 01-9, to decrease slightly in 2004 as compared to 2003. However, net of the offset of gross related party revenue required under EITF No. 01-9, we expect that amortization of partnership costs classified as an operating expense will increase in 2004 as compared to 2003. We expect this increase will be due to decreases in the level of gross related party revenue we will receive in 2004 as a result of the scheduled decrease in the maximum fees payable from Novation under the terms of the Fourth Amended Agreement from $69.2 million in 2003 to $61.0 million in 2004. See Note 3 to the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion of the impact of the application of EITF No. 01-9. See “Liquidity and Capital Resources” for a further discussion of the Outsourcing Agreement and the related cash and accounting implications.

 

Amortization of Deferred Compensation

 

     Three Months Ended
June 30,


    Percentage Change
2003 to 2004


    Six Months Ended
June 30,


    Percentage Change
2003 to 2004


 
     2003

    2004

          2003

    2004

       
     (in thousands)           (in thousands)        

Gross Amortization of Deferred Compensation

   $ 1,026     $ 1,251     21.9 %   $ 2,069     $ 1,741     (15.9 )%

Reversal of Amortization of Deferred Compensation as a Result of Employee Terminations

     (23 )     (22 )   4.3 %     (352 )     (22 )   (93.8 )%

Reduction of Amortization of Deferred Compensation due to Capitalization of Software Development Costs

     —         (30 )   *       —         (53 )   *  
    


 


       


 


     

Amortization of Deferred Compensation Recognized as Expense

   $ 1,003     $ 1,199     19.5 %   $ 1,717     $ 1,666     (3.0 )%
    


 


       


 


     

* Not meaningful

 

Deferred compensation represents the aggregate difference, at the date of grant, between the cost to the employee of equity-based compensation and the estimated fair value of the underlying equity instrument. In the case of stock options, deferred compensation is calculated as the difference between the exercise price of the option and the deemed fair value of the underlying stock on the date the

 

19


Table of Contents

option was granted. We amortize deferred compensation from stock option grants on an accelerated basis over the vesting period of the underlying options, generally four years. Amortization of deferred compensation is reversed for any amounts recognized on options that do not vest due to employee terminations or employee attrition. In connection with the grant of stock options to employees during fiscal 1998, 1999 and 2000, prior to our initial public offering, or IPO, we recorded deferred compensation of $65.2 million. During the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, we recorded $3,000, $0, $24,000 and $0, respectively, in reductions of this deferred compensation. We recorded amortization of this deferred compensation, net of reversals relating to forfeitures, of $500,000, $0, $1.0 million and $0 during the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, respectively. As of December 31, 2003, amortization of this deferred compensation was complete.

 

During 2001, 2002, 2003 and the six months ended June 30, 2004, in connection with the award of restricted stock to officers and other employees, we recorded deferred compensation of $3.6 million, $249,000, $320,000 and $6.6 million, respectively, representing the fair value of the underlying common stock at the dates of grant. The restrictions on the stock lapse on various dates through May 2006 and are subject to the continuous employment of the employees and officers with us through those dates. These amounts are presented as a reduction of stockholders’ equity and are being amortized over the periods from the date of grant through the vesting date on an accelerated basis. Amortization of deferred compensation is reversed for any amounts recognized on shares of restricted stock that do not vest due to employee terminations or employee attrition. During the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, we recorded $0, $140,000, $144,000 and $187,000, respectively, in reductions of the deferred compensation as a result of employee terminations and the resulting forfeiture of restricted stock. We recorded gross amortization of deferred compensation related to these shares of $503,000, $1.3 million, $1.0 million and $1.7 million during the three months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004 and the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, respectively.

 

The remaining total deferred compensation of $4.9 million at June 30, 2004 is expected to be amortized as follows: $2.4 million during the remainder of fiscal 2004, $2.2 million during fiscal 2005 and $272,000 during fiscal 2006. The amortization expense relates to restricted stock awarded to officers and other employees in all operating expense categories. The amount of amortization of deferred compensation has been separately allocated to these operating expense categories in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. We expect we will continue to use restricted stock grants as a means of compensation for employees in 2004 as we have in prior years. As a result, we expect to capitalize and to amortize additional deferred compensation in 2004 related to those grants.

 

Write-off of Stockholder Notes Receivable

 

We wrote off two notes receivable from stockholders, with an aggregate carrying value of $5.0 million, consisting of one note from a former executive officer and another from a former employee. These notes were issued in connection with the early exercise of employee stock option grants in fiscal 1999 and were collateralized by, among other things, the shares issued upon exercise of the options. Once the notes became due, we actively pursued collection using all reasonable efforts to collect the outstanding balances. Upon exhausting all such efforts in June 2004, we determined that these two notes were no longer collectible and, as such, we reclaimed all shares of common stock collateralizing the notes, totaling 71,250 shares, and wrote off the remaining balances. The fair value of the common stock on the date it was reclaimed and the resulting net write-off amount were as follows:

 

Carrying value of notes receivable, including accrued interest

   $ 4,955  

Less: Fair market value of reclaimed common stock

     (840 )
    


Write-off of stockholder notes receivable

   $ 4,115  
    


 

As of June 30, 2004, we had $203,000 of remaining notes receivable from stockholders outstanding. The remaining notes outstanding consist of several notes due in January 2005 from certain of our current and former employees. We intend to vigorously pursue collection on these stockholder notes receivable when and as they become due.

 

Income Taxes

 

As of December 31, 2003, we had federal and state net operating loss carryforwards of $371.0 million and $247.0 million, respectively, which may be available to reduce future taxable income. These net operating loss carryforwards expire on various dates through 2023. A valuation allowance has been recorded for the entire deferred tax asset as a result of uncertainties regarding the realization of the asset due to our lack of earnings history. Federal and state tax laws impose significant restrictions on the amount of the net operating loss carryforwards that we may utilize in a given year. Under the Tax Reform Act of 1986, the amount of benefits from net operating loss carryforwards may be impaired or limited in certain circumstances. Events which cause limitations in the amount of net operating losses that we may utilize in any one year include, but are not limited to, a cumulative ownership change of more than 50%, as defined, over a three-year period.

 

20


Table of Contents

Liquidity and Capital Resources

 

As of June 30, 2004, we had no outstanding bank, other borrowings or notes payable, and we had $22.5 million of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, as well as $1.0 million of restricted cash.

 

As discussed in Note 3 to the Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, we adopted EITF No. 01-9 effective January 1, 2002. As a result of the application of EITF No. 01-9, we have classified certain amortization costs associated with capitalized equity consideration provided to VHA and UHC in connection with the Outsourcing Agreement as an offset against gross related party revenue from VHA, UHC and Novation. This treatment results in the offset of non-cash amortization of partnership costs against gross related party revenue up to the lesser of gross related party revenue or amortization of partnership costs in any period. Any amortization of partnership costs in excess of gross related party revenue in any period is classified as an operating expense and is reflected as an adjustment to reconcile net loss to cash from operating activities on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows. Under EITF No. 01-9, we account for the fees being paid by Novation under the terms of the Outsourcing Agreement, as amended, as if they were payments made for the equity consideration we provided to VHA and UHC as opposed to payments for services. As a result, the amortization of partnership costs that is offset against gross related party revenue is reported as a cash flow from financing activities in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows.

 

Net cash used in operating activities was $32.0 million and $21.4 million for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, respectively, and primarily related to cash utilized to fund net losses and changes in our working capital, including the payment of annual cash bonuses to employees, which resulted in decreases to other accrued liabilities and accrued payroll in each period.

 

Net cash used in investing activities was $3.8 million and $3.9 million for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, respectively. Net cash used in investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2003 primarily related to the purchase of capital equipment to operate our solutions. Net cash used in investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2004 primarily related to capitalized internal use software development costs and the purchase of capital equipment to operate our solutions, which were partially offset by net sales of marketable investments.

 

Net cash provided by financing activities was $33.1 million and $32.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004, respectively. Net cash provided by financing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2003 and 2004 primarily related to fees received from Novation under the fee level provisions of the Outsourcing Agreement, as amended, which, in the six months ended June 30, 2003, was partially offset by repayments of notes payable.

 

In April 2001, we entered into a revolving credit agreement with VHA. Under this credit agreement, as amended in February 2002, December 2002 and December 2003, we are able to borrow funds until December 31, 2004 up to an amount based on a specified formula dependent on the gross volume of transactions through Marketplace@Novation. Funds that we borrow under this credit agreement bear interest at the prime rate plus 2.75% per year and are secured by substantially all of our assets. All amounts outstanding under this line of credit, both principal and interest, are due and payable on December 31, 2004, if not repaid sooner. In the event that we (i) sell any of our stock as part of an equity financing, (ii) obtain funding in connection with a debt financing or other lending transaction that is either unsecured or subordinate to the lien of VHA under the credit agreement or (iii) enter into a debt financing or other lending transaction secured by assets we owned as of the date we entered into the credit agreement, then the maximum we could potentially borrow under the credit agreement will be reduced by an amount equal to the cash proceeds we receive from any of these transactions. During 2003, we repaid all amounts outstanding under the line of credit, including accrued interest, and amended the line of credit to reduce its capacity from the original $25.0 million to $15.0 million. As of June 30, 2004, there was no balance outstanding and there was $15.0 million of remaining capacity available to us under the line of credit.

 

We currently anticipate that our available funds, consisting of cash and cash equivalents, combined with those funds we expect to generate in 2004 and funds available to us through our line of credit, will be sufficient to meet our anticipated needs for working capital and capital expenditures through at least the next 12 months. Our future long-term capital needs will depend significantly on the rate of growth of our business, the timing of expanded service offerings, the success of these services once they are launched and our ability to adjust our operating expenses to an appropriate level if the growth rate of our business is slower than expected. Hospitals and suppliers might not accept our business model of providing Web-based supply chain management solutions for the healthcare industry and, as a result, we may not succeed in increasing our revenue and controlling our expenses to the extent necessary to be cash flow positive during the second half of 2004 and beyond. Any projections of future long-term cash needs and cash flows are subject to substantial uncertainty. If our available funds and cash generated from operations are insufficient to satisfy our long-term liquidity requirements, we might need to seek additional sources of funding, such as selling additional equity or debt securities or obtaining additional lines of credit. We also might need to curtail expansion of our services, including reductions in our staffing levels and related expenses, or potentially liquidate selected assets. If our management decides that it is in our best interest to raise cash to strengthen our balance sheet, broaden our investor base, increase the liquidity of our stock or for any other reason, we may decide to issue equity or debt, even if all of our current funding sources remain available to us. If we issue additional securities to raise funds, those securities may have rights, preferences or privileges senior to those of the rights of our common stock and our stockholders may experience dilution. We cannot be certain that additional financing will be available to us on favorable terms when required, or at all.

 

21


Table of Contents

Factors That May Affect Future Operating Results

 

The risks described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks not presently known to us, or that we currently deem immaterial, may also impair our business operations. Our business, financial condition or results of operations may be seriously harmed by any of these risks.

 

If participants in the healthcare supply chain do not accept our business model of providing solutions designed to improve efficiencies in the healthcare supply chain, demand for our solutions may not develop as we expect and the price of our common stock may decline

 

We have focused our efforts on developing solutions that address the inefficiencies in the healthcare supply chain. This business model is new and unproven and depends upon participants in this market adopting a new way of doing business and exchanging information. Participants, other than VHA and UHC member hospitals, have been reluctant to accept our relatively new and unproven approach, which may not be consistent with their existing internal organization and procurement and sale processes. Some participants may prefer to use traditional methods of doing business, such as using paper catalogs and exchanging information in person or by phone. If participants in the healthcare supply chain do not accept our business model, demand for our solutions may not develop as we expect and the price of our common stock could decline.

 

Our main source of business is derived from the solutions we provide through Marketplace@Novation, and we rely on our relationship with Novation, VHA and UHC to drive participation in Marketplace@Novation. As a result, our business may be seriously harmed if these relationships are materially altered or terminated

 

Our main source of business is derived from the solutions we provide through Marketplace@Novation. We have relied, and expect to continue to rely, significantly on our relationship with Novation, VHA and UHC to bring hospitals and suppliers to Marketplace@Novation. We rely on Novation to assist us in attracting suppliers to Marketplace@Novation and, if Novation is unable to attract a sufficient number of suppliers, the value of Marketplace@Novation to hospitals will be substantially decreased and our business will suffer. We rely significantly on VHA and UHC to assist us in recruiting and retaining hospitals to Marketplace@Novation. These partners use a variety of marketing initiatives and financial incentives to drive adoption and use of Marketplace@Novation and our solutions by hospitals. If these partners cease using such marketing initiatives and financial incentives, our ability to recruit hospitals to Marketplace@Novation also may be seriously harmed.

 

Under the Fourth Amended Agreement, we must meet detailed functionality and service level requirements. If we are unable to achieve these required levels of functionality within a required time period, we may be required to pay significant liquidated damages or the Fourth Amended Agreement could be terminated, which would seriously harm our business and financial results.

 

Our solutions and fee model are untested and their acceptance is not assured

 

Our solutions are either of recent introduction or are currently under development, and their acceptance by our existing and potential customers is therefore untested and uncertain. Our current business plan includes seeking a large portion of our revenue from suppliers. Obtaining the acceptance from suppliers to pay our fees has proven difficult. If suppliers do not accept our solutions or our fee model, it would have a serious negative impact on our ability to grow our business.

 

We have a history of losses, anticipate incurring losses in the foreseeable future and may never achieve profitability

 

We have experienced losses from operations in each period since our inception, including a net loss of $31.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2004. In addition, as of June 30, 2004, we had an accumulated deficit of $724.3 million. We have not achieved profitability and we expect to continue to incur operating losses in future quarters, primarily as a result of costs relating to the amortization of the stock we issued to VHA and UHC and the costs and expenses relating to executing our strategy of developing solutions and services to address healthcare supply chain inefficiencies. We cannot assure you that we will ever be profitable.

 

If our customers or third party vendors refuse to provide us with consent to use their transaction data and product data, severely restrict our use of their data, or decline to use our solutions because of concerns about the potential release of such data to other customers or partners, our business strategy may not succeed

 

We expect to derive a portion of our future revenue from information services that require the use of data from our hospital, GPO and supplier customers and other third party vendors. To execute on our data services strategy, we must be able to secure the consent of our customers and these third party vendors to various uses of their data. To secure such consent, we must be able to assure these customers and third party vendors that we will at all times protect the confidentiality of their data and use the data in the manner to which we agreed. If we are unable to provide such assurance, or if we fail or are perceived by our customers and third party vendors to have failed to meet the levels of assurance that we provided, our ability to execute on our data services strategy may be seriously

 

22


Table of Contents

impaired. In addition, we must be able to abide by various contractual provisions to which we have agreed concerning our ability to aggregate and blind data in such a way that the data cannot be used to identify any participants to transactions underlying the data. Our inability to do so would potentially subject us to liability for contractual damages and might seriously impair our data services strategy. If potential customers are concerned about other customers viewing their transaction data, they may decide to forgo use of our solutions, and this could seriously impair our ability to generate revenue in the future.

 

The connectivity agreement that we have with GHX expires in late August 2004, and unless this agreement is extended, or we enter into a new agreement with GHX, we may have difficulty ensuring proper connectivity with certain of our supplier customers or we may have to expend resources re-connecting certain suppliers to Marketplace@Novation

 

We signed a three-year connectivity agreement, as well as a three-year license agreement, with GHX in 2001. This agreement will expire in late August 2004 unless both we and GHX elect to extend it or we both decide to enter into a new agreement. Some of our supplier customers use GHX to connect to our hospital customers, and without an agreement with GHX, we may have to re-establish connectivity with those suppliers, which would cause us to expend resources which might reduce our ability to provide timely service to other customers and temporarily reduce our ability to collect transaction data.

 

If we are unable to enhance the functionality of our solutions or develop new solutions, potential customers may choose not to enter into business relationships with us, which would harm our business

 

We must continue to develop the capability to integrate our solutions with our hospital and supplier customers’ business processes and information systems, and develop new solutions for our customers. We may incur significant expenses in developing these capabilities and may not succeed in developing them in a timely manner. In addition, developing the capability to integrate some of our solutions with suppliers’ and hospitals’ enterprise software systems will require the continued cooperation of and collaboration with the companies that develop and market these systems. Suppliers and hospitals use a variety of different enterprise software systems provided by third-party vendors or developed internally. This lack of uniformity increases the difficulty and cost of developing the capability to integrate with the systems of a large number of hospitals and suppliers. Failure to provide this capability would limit the efficiencies that our solutions provide and may deter our hospital and supplier customers from using our solutions.

 

If the future costs required to integrate the systems of hospitals purchasing through Novation are substantially higher than we anticipate, we may not realize the full benefits of our agreement with Novation.

 

If we were delayed or unable to integrate the systems of these hospitals, our financial situation would be adversely affected. In addition, under our agreement with Novation, we must meet detailed functionality and service level requirements. To the extent we are unable to or are delayed in providing this functionality, we may be unable to attract hospitals and suppliers to use our solutions and our financial situation may be adversely affected. We incur significant costs in developing and supporting our solutions and in integrating with hospitals’ and suppliers’ information systems, and we may never generate sufficient fees to offset these costs.

 

Because our supply chain partners are also our stockholders or are affiliated with our stockholders, we may find it difficult to attract competing companies to use our solutions

 

Our supply chain partners are also our stockholders or are affiliated with our stockholders or have strategic relationships with us. For example, VHA and UHC, the owners of Novation, owned 8.6 million and 2.1 million shares of our common stock, respectively, as of June 30, 2004. As of June 30, 2004, VHA and UHC owned 43.1% and 10.7%, respectively, of our outstanding shares of common stock. These relationships may deter other potential customers, particularly those that compete directly with Novation, VHA or UHC, from using our solutions due to perceptions of bias in favor of one party over another. This could limit the array of solutions we offer, damage our reputation and limit our ability to maintain or increase the number of our customers.

 

Our ability to earn fees in future periods from Marketplace@Novation is limited by quarterly maximums, and, as a result, we must generate increased non-related party revenue in order to grow our revenue

 

We generate the substantial majority of our business from Marketplace@Novation. Our ability to earn fees from Novation for the solutions we provide in connection with Marketplace@Novation depends on several factors, and the fees are subject to limitation by quarterly maximums. During the last eight quarters, including the first and second quarters of 2004, our fees were limited by these quarterly maximums. We expect that our fees will continue to be limited by these maximums in 2004 and in future periods. Consequently, we must generate increased non-related party revenue in order to grow our revenue. In mid-2005, we expect that the significant majority of the capitalized partnership costs will be fully amortized and, as a result, our total revenue will increase substantially beginning in the quarter that our gross related party revenue is initially no longer offset by amortization of capitalized partnership costs. However, we still believe that we must generate non-related party revenue growth in order to show improved operational results.

 

23


Table of Contents

If our systems are unable to provide acceptable performance as the use of our solutions increases, we could lose customers, which could harm our business and results of operations

 

We have supported only a limited number and variety of transactions through our solutions compared to the number and variety we expect to process in the future. Our systems may not accommodate increased use while providing acceptable overall performance. We must continue to expand and adapt our network infrastructure to accommodate increased use of our solutions by our customers, which will be expensive. If our systems do not continue to provide acceptable performance as use by our customers’ increases, our reputation may be damaged and we may lose customers. We have had temporary system outages in the past and we may have such temporary outages in the future. If system outages occur frequently or are severe, our customers may decide that our performance levels are unacceptable and may choose not to continue to use our services or may claim liability against us.

 

We expect that a significant portion of the products and services used by hospitals that are sold through Marketplace@Novation will come from a limited number of key manufacturers and distributors, and the loss of a key manufacturer or distributor could result in a significant negative impact on the value of Marketplace@Novation and, consequently, our business

 

We expect that a significant portion of the products to be sold through and data and fees to be generated from Marketplace@Novation will come as a result of the participation of a limited number of key manufacturers and distributors. If any of these key manufacturers or distributors cease doing business with us, the fees we generate through Marketplace@Novation could be significantly reduced, the value of Marketplace@Novation to our hospital customers would be reduced and our ability to generate revenue-producing data for our customers would also be reduced.

 

We face significant competition, and if we are unable to compete effectively, we may be unable to maintain or expand the number of our customers and our financial position may be adversely affected

 

The market for supply chain management solutions in the healthcare industry is rapidly evolving and highly competitive. Because of the breadth of our solutions, which include order management, contract management, data management and materials management, we have a diverse set of competitors that compete with portions of our overall offering. To best serve our customers, we sometimes collaborate with our competitors in one segment of the market while competing with them in others. We believe that as our capabilities grow, we will continue to find areas of opportunity for both collaboration and competition with other companies in the market that target a segment of the overall healthcare supply chain. Our ability to manage these relationships to benefit our hospital, supplier and GPO customers is important to our success.

 

Some of our current and potential competitors include:

 

  online marketplaces or exchanges targeted at the healthcare supply chain, such as the supplier-sponsored GHX, with whom we also have a strategic relationship;

 

  suppliers that have created their own offerings to provide supply chain management services to their customers;

 

  software vendors that offer enterprise resource planning applications, including procurement, to the healthcare market, such as Lawson Software, McKesson Corporation, Oracle Corporation, PeopleSoft, Inc. and SAP AG;

 

  consultants and consulting firms that provide supply chain management advice and services, including assistance with the selection of software, services and vendors to support hospitals in driving efficiency and cost reductions;

 

  GPOs that are offering supply chain management services beyond traditional GPO services, such as Broadlane, Inc. and MedAssets, Inc.; and

 

  companies that provide information solutions or information services to participants in the healthcare supply chain.

 

Competition is likely to intensify as our market matures. As competitive conditions intensify, our competitors may enter into strategic or commercial relationships with larger, more established healthcare, medical products or Internet companies or with each other, secure services and products from suppliers on more favorable terms, devote greater resources to marketing and promotional campaigns, secure exclusive arrangements with hospitals that impede our sales and devote substantially more resources to Web site and systems development and research and development.

 

Our current and potential competitors’ services may achieve greater market acceptance than ours. Our current and potential competitors may have longer operating histories in the healthcare supply chain market, greater name recognition, larger customer bases or greater financial, technical and/or marketing resources than we do. As a result of these factors, our competitors and potential competitors may be able to respond more quickly to market forces, undertake more extensive marketing campaigns for their brands and services and make more attractive offers to hospitals and suppliers, potential employees and strategic allies. In addition, new

 

24


Table of Contents

technologies may increase competitive pressures. We cannot be certain that we will be able to expand our hospital and supplier base or retain our current hospitals and supplier customers. We may not be able to compete successfully against our competitors, and competition could seriously harm our revenue, operating margins and market share.

 

If we are unable to attract qualified personnel or retain our executive officers and other key personnel, we may not be able to compete successfully in our industry

 

Our success depends on our ability to attract and retain qualified, experienced employees. We may not be able to compete effectively to retain and attract employees. As a result, our employees may seek employment with larger, more established companies or companies they perceive to have better prospects. Should we fail to retain or attract qualified personnel, we may not be able to compete successfully in our industry, and our business would be harmed.

 

We believe that our ability to successfully execute our business strategy will depend on the continued services of executive officers and other key employees. Our employees, including our executive officers, serve at-will and may elect to pursue other opportunities at any time. The loss of any of our executive officers or other key employees could harm our business.

 

If we are unable to obtain additional financing for our future capital needs, we may be unable to develop new solutions or enhance the functionality of our existing solutions, expand our operations, respond to competitive pressures or continue our operations

 

As of June 30, 2004, we had $22.5 million of cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, $1.0 million of restricted cash and no outstanding borrowings or notes payable.

 

We may need to raise additional funds within the next 12 months, notwithstanding the fact that our VHA line of credit currently remains in place, if for example, we experience larger than anticipated operating losses or if we pursue acquisitions that contain a cash component. We may try to obtain additional financing by issuing shares of our common stock or convertible debt, either of which could dilute our existing stockholders and may cause our stock price to decline. In addition, if an event of default were to occur under the VHA credit agreement, VHA could terminate the credit agreement. If this were to occur, we may need to obtain an alternate source of funding, such as another credit line or an equity or debt financing.

 

We believe that it could be difficult to obtain additional financing on favorable terms, if at all. If we were unable to obtain alternate funding under these circumstances, our business would be seriously harmed.

 

We may make acquisitions that could harm our operating results, put a strain on our resources or cause dilution to our stockholders

 

We may decide that it would be in our best interests to make acquisitions to acquire new technologies, enhance or expand our solutions or for other reasons. Integrating newly acquired organizations and technologies into our company could be expensive, time consuming and may strain our resources. In addition, we may lose current customers if any acquired companies have relationships with competitors of our users. Consequently, we may not be successful in integrating any acquired businesses or technologies and may not achieve anticipated revenue and cost benefits. In addition, future acquisitions could result in potentially dilutive issuances of equity securities or the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities or amortization expenses related to intangible assets, any of which could harm our business and could cause the price of our common stock to decline.

 

Our operating results are difficult to predict, and if we fail to meet the expectations of investors or securities analysts, the market price of our common stock will likely decline

 

Our operating results may fluctuate from quarter to quarter and are difficult to predict because of a number of factors. These factors include:

 

  the fees we collect from suppliers;

 

  changes in the fees we charge users of our solutions;

 

  the number and timing of new suppliers that sign up to use our solutions and our ability to implement and train them;

 

  the timing of and expenses incurred in enhancing our solutions;

 

  the timing and size of any future acquisitions;

 

  the timing and size of Neoforma DMS deals;

 

  the amount of related party revenue we offset by amortization of partnership costs; and

 

  the extent of software development efforts qualifying for capitalization.

 

25


Table of Contents

Fluctuations in our operating results may cause us to fail to meet the expectations of investors or securities analysts. If this were to happen, the market price of our common stock would likely decline.

 

If we are unable to safeguard the security and privacy of the confidential information of our customers, these customers may discontinue using our solutions

 

A significant barrier to the widespread adoption of e-commerce is the secure transmission of personally identifiable information of Internet users as well as other confidential information over public networks. If any compromise or breach of security were to occur, it could harm our reputation and expose us to possible liability. We support encrypted communications protocols and encrypt certain information on our servers to protect user information during transactions, and we employ a security consulting firm that periodically tests our security measures. Despite these efforts, a party may be able to circumvent our security measures and could misappropriate proprietary information or cause interruptions in our operations. We may be required to make significant expenditures to protect against security breaches or to alleviate problems caused by any breaches and under certain contracts with customers would be liable for contractual damages due to security breaches.

 

If we are not able to increase recognition of the Neoforma brand name, our ability to attract users to our solutions will be limited

 

We believe that recognition and positive perception of the Neoforma brand name in the healthcare industry are important to our success. We intend to continue to invest in marketing programs and initiatives to build the value of our brand. However, such marketing programs and initiatives may be expensive and may not achieve our desired goal of increasing the positive awareness of the Neoforma brand name. Even if recognition of our name increases, it may not lead to an increase in the number of our customers or revenue or offset the expenditures we incurred in increasing our name recognition.

 

If suppliers do not provide us with timely, accurate, complete and current information about their products and comply with government regulations, we may be exposed to liability or there may be a decrease in the adoption and use of our solutions

 

If suppliers do not provide us in a timely manner with accurate, complete and current information about the products they offer, promptly update this information when it changes and provide us with accurate and timely invoicing data, our databases will be less useful to hospitals. We cannot guarantee that the product information available from our solutions will always be accurate, complete and current, or that it will comply with governmental regulations. This could expose us to liability if this incorrect information harms users of our services or results in decreased adoption and use of our solutions. We also rely on suppliers using our solutions to comply with all applicable governmental regulations, including packaging, labeling, hazardous materials, health and environmental regulations and licensing and record keeping requirements. Any failure of our suppliers to comply with applicable regulations could expose us to civil or criminal liability or could damage our reputation.

 

Our growth and organizational changes have placed a strain on our systems and resources, and if we fail to successfully manage any future growth and organizational changes, we may not be able to manage our business efficiently and may be unable to execute our business plans

 

We have, in the past, grown rapidly and will need to continue to grow our business to execute our strategy. Our total number of employees grew from nine as of December 31, 1997, to 267 as of June 30, 2004, although the number of employees has not grown consistently. These changes, and the growth in the number of our customers and their use of our solutions, have placed significant demands on management as well as on our administrative, operational and financial resources and controls. Any future growth or organizational changes would likely cause similar, and perhaps increased, strain on our systems and controls.

 

If suppliers that use our solutions do not provide timely and professional delivery of products and services to their hospital customers, hospitals may not continue using our solutions

 

Through certain of our solutions, suppliers are responsible for delivering their products and services sold to hospitals. Currently, the significant majority of these products and services are sold through Marketplace@Novation. If these suppliers fail to make delivery in a professional, safe and timely manner, then our solutions will not meet the expectations of hospitals, and our reputation and brand will be damaged. In addition, deliveries that are non-conforming, late or are not accompanied by information required by applicable law or regulations could expose us to liability or result in decreased adoption and use of our solutions.

 

26


Table of Contents

If we lose access to third-party software incorporated in our solutions, we may not be able to use our solutions

 

We currently rely on software that we have licensed from a number of software vendors. We will continue to rely on commercial software vendors where appropriate to speed the delivery of our solutions, while reducing the costs of custom code development and maintenance. These licenses may not continue to be available to us on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. In addition, the licensors may not continue to support or enhance the licensed software. In the future, we expect to license other third party technologies to enhance our solutions to meet evolving user needs or to adapt to changing technology standards. Failure to license, or the loss of any licenses of, necessary technologies could impair our ability to offer our solutions until equivalent software is identified, licensed and integrated or developed by us. In addition, we may fail to successfully integrate licensed technology into our solutions or to adapt licensed technology to support our specific needs, which could similarly harm development and market acceptance of our solutions.

 

If we are unable to protect our intellectual property, our competitors may gain access to our technology, which could harm our business

 

We regard our intellectual property as critical to our success. If we are unable to protect our intellectual property rights, our business would be harmed. We rely on trademark, copyright, patent and trade secret laws to protect our proprietary rights. We have registered several marks including NEOFORMA and associated logos. We have applied for a patent of our Success Tracker customer value product. Our trademark registration and patent applications may not be approved or granted, or, if granted, may be successfully challenged by others or invalidated through administrative process or litigation.

 

Despite our efforts to protect our proprietary rights, unauthorized parties may attempt to copy aspects of our products or to obtain and use information that we regard as proprietary. Litigation may be necessary in the future to enforce our intellectual property rights, protect our trade secrets and determine the validity and scope of the proprietary rights of others. Any resulting litigation could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and could seriously harm our business.

 

We may be subject to intellectual property claims, and if we were to subsequently lose our intellectual property rights, we could be unable to operate our current business

 

We may from time to time be subject to claims of infringement of other parties’ proprietary rights or claims that our own trademarks, patents or other intellectual property rights are invalid. Any claims regarding our intellectual property, with or without merit, could be time consuming and costly to defend, divert management attention and resources or require us to pay significant damages. License agreements may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. In addition, there has been a large number of patent applications related to the use of the Internet to perform business processes. Enforcement of intellectual property rights in the Internet sector will become a greater source of risk as the number of business process patents increases. The loss of access to any key intellectual property right, including use of the Neoforma brand name, could result in our inability to operate our current business.

 

Our infrastructure and systems are vulnerable to natural disasters and other unexpected events, and if any of these events of a significant magnitude were to occur, the extent of our losses could exceed the amount of insurance we carry to compensate us for any losses

 

The performance of our server and networking hardware and software infrastructure is critical to our business and reputation and our ability to process transactions, provide high quality customer service and attract and retain users of our solutions. Currently, our infrastructure and systems are located at one site in Sunnyvale, California, which is an area susceptible to earthquakes. We also have a limited fail-over system located in Denver, Colorado.

 

Our systems and operations are vulnerable to damage or interruption from human error, terrorist attacks, natural disasters, power loss, telecommunications failures, break-ins, sabotage, computer viruses, intentional acts of vandalism and similar events. We do not yet have a formal disaster recovery plan, although it is our intention to formulate one. In addition, we may not carry sufficient business interruption insurance to compensate us for losses that could occur.

 

Our failure to comply with applicable federal and state regulation of healthcare information could disrupt our operations, increase our operating costs and subject us to liability

 

We are subject to federal and state laws regulating the receipt, storage and distribution of healthcare information, which could have a material adverse effect on our ability to operate our business. Laws governing the receipt, storage and distribution of health information exist at both the federal and state level. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, and the implementing regulations from the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, mandate the use of standard transactions and identifiers, prescribed security measures and other provisions. Certain regulations of the Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, and the Hospital Conditions of Participation for the Medicare and Medicaid programs require protection of and security for health information and appropriate patient access to such information. Some of the transactions using our solutions may involve surgical case kits or purchases of products for patient home delivery; these products may contain patient names and other protected health information subject to these laws governing the receipt, storage and distribution of protected health information.

 

27


Table of Contents

It may be expensive to implement security or other measures designed to comply with the HIPAA, FDA and Medicare confidentiality and security requirements or with any new legislation or regulations. Moreover, these and future laws may restrict or prevent us from delivering health information electronically. If we fail to comply with these regulatory requirements, we could face a variety of civil fines and liabilities, associated costs of defense, increased costs of security, and costs of compliance with confidentiality requirements. We may also be required to significantly curtail our use of data received, stored or distributed by our solutions. In addition, because we represent and sometimes contractually warrant that our solutions meet these regulatory requirements, our success will also depend on other healthcare participants complying with these regulations.

 

Our failure to comply with applicable federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws could subject us and our GPO partners and customers to civil and criminal liability and disrupt our operations

 

A federal law commonly known as the Medicare/Medicaid anti-kickback law, and several similar state laws, prohibit payments that are intended to induce the acquisition, arrangement for or recommendation of the acquisition of healthcare products or services. The application and interpretation of these laws are complex and difficult to predict and could constrain our financial and marketing relationships, including, but not limited to, our fee arrangements with suppliers or our ability to obtain supplier company sponsorship for our solutions. The GPO industry has been the subject of a series of critical newspaper articles and has been investigated by the United States Senate Judiciary Committee, which has set practice guidelines for the GPO industry. Because anything detrimental to the core business of our GPO partners could adversely impact our business, negative substantive findings by the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Justice Department or other regulatory and enforcement bodies could potentially adversely affect our business and consequently our stock price. In particular, violations of fraud and abuse laws are punishable by civil and criminal fines and penalties, which could result in restrictions on our operations, increased costs of compliance with remedies and restructuring of our financial arrangements with our GPO and supply chain partners.

 

If there are changes in the political, economic or regulatory healthcare environment that affect the purchasing practice or operation of hospitals, or our supply chain partners, our business and our stock price could be adversely affected

 

The healthcare industry is highly regulated and is subject to changing political, economic and regulatory influences. Regulation of the healthcare organizations with which we do business could impact the way in which we are able to do business with these organizations. In addition, factors such as changes in the laws described above regarding the regulation of healthcare information and the laws and policies governing reimbursement for healthcare expenses affect the purchasing practices and operation of hospitals and GPOs. Changes in regulations affecting the healthcare industry, such as any increased regulation by HHS, the Justice Department or the FDA of healthcare information or the purchase and sale of products used by hospitals and GPOs could require us to make unplanned enhancements of our solutions or result in delays or cancellations of orders or reduce demand for our solutions. Federal and state legislatures have periodically considered programs to reform or amend the U.S. healthcare system at both the federal and state level. These programs may contain proposals to increase governmental involvement in healthcare, lower reimbursement rates or otherwise change the environment in which healthcare industry participants, including GPOs and companies such as us, operate.

 

The restatement of some of our financial results may subject us to litigation

 

Because we restated our financial results for the first and second fiscal quarter of 2002, as well as fiscal 2000 and 2001, we could be subjected to litigation. Any claims, with or without merit, could be time-consuming and costly to defend.

 

We may be subject to litigation for defects in products sold by suppliers using our solutions, and this product liability litigation may be costly and time consuming to defend

 

Because certain of our solutions facilitate the sale of products by suppliers, we may become subject to legal proceedings regarding defects in these products, even though we do not take title to these products. Any claims, with or without merit, could be time-consuming and costly to defend.

 

Securities class action lawsuits in which we have been named, relating to investment banking practices in connection with our initial public offering, may prove costly to defend, and if we are found liable, may expose us to financial liability greater than we are able to sustain

 

In July 2001, we were named as a defendant in two securities class action lawsuits filed in federal court in the Southern District of New York relating to our IPO by stockholders who purchased our common stock during the period from January 24, 2000, to December 6, 2000. Since that time, additional lawsuits have been filed asserting federal securities claims arising from our IPO. The lawsuits also name certain of the underwriters for our IPO, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Bear Stearns and Fleet Boston

 

28


Table of Contents

Robertson Stephens, as defendants. The lawsuits contain substantially identical allegations, which are that the prospectus and the registration statement for the IPO failed to disclose that the underwriters solicited and received excessive commissions from investors, and that some investors in the IPO agreed to buy more shares of our common stock in the secondary market, at predetermined prices, in a scheme to artificially inflate the price of our common stock. Although we have agreed to settle the suits, if the settlement is not finalized, the suits could be time-consuming, costly to defend and require us to pay significant damages.

 

Regulation of the Internet is unsettled, and future regulations could inhibit the growth of e-commerce and limit the market for our solutions

 

A number of legislative and regulatory proposals under consideration by federal, state, local and foreign governmental organizations may lead to laws or regulations concerning various aspects of the Internet, such as user privacy, taxation of goods and services provided over the Internet and the pricing, content and quality of services. Legislation could dampen the growth in Internet usage and decrease or limit its acceptance as a communications and commercial medium. If enacted, these laws and regulations could limit the market for our solutions. In addition, existing laws could be applied to the Internet, including consumer privacy laws. Legislation or application of existing laws could expose companies involved in e-commerce to increased liability, which could limit the growth of e-commerce.

 

Our stock price, like the stock prices of other technology companies, has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations, and, accordingly, our stock price may continue to be volatile, which could negatively affect your investment

 

The trading price of our common stock has fluctuated significantly since our IPO in January 2000 and is significantly below the original offering price. Our public float and the daily trading volume of our common stock are relatively small, and an active public market for our common stock may not be sustained in the future. Many factors could cause the market price of our common stock to fluctuate, including:

 

  variations in our quarterly operating results;

 

  announcements of new accounting pronouncements or legal rules or regulations;

 

  announcements of technological innovations by us or by our competitors;

 

  introductions of new services by us or by our competitors;

 

  departure of key personnel;

 

  the gain or loss of significant strategic relationships or customers;

 

  changes in the estimates of our operating performance or changes in recommendations by securities analysts; and

 

  changes in the number of securities analysts that follow our company.

 

Because our public float and the daily trading volume of our common stock are relatively small, these factors could have a greater impact on our common stock than for companies for which a more active public market exists for their common stock. In addition, stocks of technology companies have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that often have been unrelated or disproportionate to these companies’ operating performance. Public announcements by companies in our industry concerning, among other things, their performance, accounting practices or legal problems could cause fluctuations in the market for stocks of these companies. These fluctuations could lower the market price of our common stock regardless of our actual operating performance.

 

Because VHA and UHC collectively beneficially own a majority of our stock, they have substantial control over all matters requiring stockholder approval and significant sales of stock held by them could have a negative effect on our stock price

 

As of June 30, 2004, VHA and UHC beneficially owned 43.1% and 10.7%, respectively, of our outstanding common stock. As a result of their ownership positions, VHA and UHC individually are able to significantly influence, and collectively are able to control, all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors and approval of significant corporate transactions. Such concentration of ownership may also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of our company. In addition, sales of significant amounts of shares held by either of VHA and UHC or collectively, or the prospect of these sales, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

 

29


Table of Contents

ITEM 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

 

Our exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates relates primarily to our investment portfolio. We do not use derivative financial instruments in our investment portfolio. By policy, we limit the amount of credit exposure to any one issuer. As stated in our investment policy, we seek to ensure the safety and preservation of our invested funds by limiting default risk, market risk and reinvestment risk. We mitigate default risk by investing in safe and high-credit quality securities and by reviewing our portfolio monthly to respond appropriately to a significant reduction in a credit rating of any investment issuer, guarantor or depository. Our portfolio includes only marketable securities with active secondary or resale markets to ensure portfolio liquidity. Because our investments mature within one year, a hypothetical change in interest rate of 10% would not have a significant effect on the value of our investments and would reduce interest income by approximately $6,000.

 

The table below presents principal amounts and related weighted average interest rates by date of maturity for our investment portfolio (in thousands):

 

     Fiscal years

     2004

    2005

   2006

   2007

   2008

Cash equivalents and short-term investments:

                           

Fixed rate short-term investments

   $ 11,637     —      —      —      —  

Cash equivalents

   $ 2,808     —      —      —      —  

Average interest rate

     1.38 %   —      —      —      —  

 

ITEM 4. Controls and Procedures

 

(a) Disclosure Controls and Procedures

 

We carried out an evaluation required by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, under the supervision and with the participation of our principal executive officer and principal financial officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on this evaluation, our principal executive officer and principal financial officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are effective at the “reasonable assurance” level in timely alerting them to material information required to be included in our periodic SEC reports. It should be noted that the design of any system of controls is based in part upon certain assumptions, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals.

 

(b) Changes in Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting

 

During the most recent fiscal quarter, there did not occur any change in our internal control over financial reporting that materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

 

30


Table of Contents

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

 

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

 

In July 2001, Neoforma, along with Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Bear Stearns and FleetBoston Robertson Stephens (certain of the underwriters of our initial public offering (IPO)), as well as our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Robert Zollars, and its former Chief Financial Officer, Frederick Ruegsegger, were named as defendants in two securities class action lawsuits filed in federal court in the Southern District of New York (No. 01 CV 6689 and No. 01 CV 6712) on behalf of those who purchased shares of our common stock from January 24, 2000 to December 6, 2000. These actions have since been consolidated, and a consolidated amended complaint was filed in the Southern District of New York on April 24, 2002. The amended complaint alleges that the underwriters solicited and received “undisclosed compensation” from investors in exchange for allocations of stock in our IPO, and that some investors in the IPO allegedly agreed with the underwriters to buy additional shares in the aftermarket to artificially inflate the price of our stock. We and Messrs. Zollars and Ruegsegger are named in the suits pursuant to Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, for allegedly failing to disclose in our IPO registration statement and prospectus that the underwriters had entered into the arrangements described above. The complaints seek unspecified damages. Approximately 300 other issuers and their underwriters have had similar suits filed against them, all of which are included in a single coordinated proceeding in the Southern District of New York. On July 1, 2002, the underwriter defendants moved to dismiss all of the IPO allocation litigation complaints against them, including the action involving us. On July 15, 2002, we, along with the other non-underwriter defendants in the coordinated cases, also moved to dismiss the litigation. Those motions were fully briefed on September 13 and September 27, 2002, respectively, and in February 2003, the Court denied our motion to dismiss. On October 9, 2002, all of the individual defendants, including Mr. Zollars and Mr. Ruegsegger, were dismissed from the action without prejudice. On June 30, 2003, our board of directors approved a proposed settlement for this matter, which is part of a larger global settlement between the issuers and plaintiffs. The acceptance of the settlement by the plaintiffs is contingent on a number of factors, including the percentage of issuers who approve the proposed settlement. We have agreed to undertake other responsibilities under the proposed settlement, including agreeing to assign away, not assert, or release certain potential claims we may have against its underwriters. Any direct financial impact of the proposed settlement is expected to be borne by our insurers. In June 2004, an agreement of settlement was submitted to the court for preliminary approval. We are unable to determine whether or when the settlement will be approved or finalized. Due to the inherent uncertainties of litigation however, we cannot accurately predict the ultimate outcome of the lawsuits.

 

Item 2. Changes in Securities, Use of Proceeds and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

 

None.

 

Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities

 

None.

 

Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

 

Our 2004 Annual Meeting of Stockholders was held on May 27, 2004 at our corporate offices at 3061 Zanker Road, San Jose, California. At the meeting, our stockholders voted upon (i) the election of two Class II directors, and Jeffrey H. Hillebrand and Wayne B. Lowell, each for a term of three years and until his successor has been elected and qualified or until his earlier resignation, death or removal, and (ii) to ratify the selection of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP as our independent auditor for the year ending December 31, 2004.

 

The director nominees received the following votes:

 

Nominee


   For

   Withheld

   Unvoted

Jeffrey H. Hillebrand

   18,918,346    291,342    760,473

Wayne B. Lowell

   18,918,346    291,342    760,473

 

Edward A. Blechschmidt and Michael J. Murray, our Class I directors, and Richard D. Helppie, C. Thomas Smith, and Robert J. Zollars, our Class III directors, continued to serve as our directors after the meeting, as the Class I and Class III directors were not up for reelection at the 2004 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

 

31


Table of Contents

The ratification of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP received the following votes:

 

     For

   Against

   Abstain

   Unvoted

Ratification of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

   19,195,929    12,201    1,558    760,473

 

Item 5. Other Information

 

None.

 

Item 6. Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K

 

(a) Exhibits

 

10.1   Services Agreement (“Agreement”) by and between VHA Inc. and Neoforma, Inc. effective on June 1, 2004.*
31.1   Certification of Robert J. Zollars, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Neoforma, Inc., Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
31.2   Certification of Andrew L. Guggenhime, Chief Financial Officer of Neoforma, Inc., Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
32.1   Certification of Robert J. Zollars, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Neoforma, Inc., Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.
32.2   Certification of Andrew L. Guggenhime, Chief Financial Officer of Neoforma, Inc., Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.

* Confidential treatment has been requested for portions of this exhibit.

 

(b) Reports on Form 8-K

 

None.

 

32


Table of Contents

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.

 

Date: August 5, 2004   NEOFORMA, INC.
    By:  

/s/ ANDREW L. GUGGENHIME


       

Andrew L. Guggenhime

Chief Financial Officer

 

INDEX TO EXHIBITS

 

(a) Exhibits

 

10.1   Services Agreement (“Agreement”) by and between VHA Inc. and Neoforma, Inc. effective on June 1, 2004.*
31.1   Certification of Robert J. Zollars, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Neoforma, Inc., Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
31.2   Certification of Andrew L. Guggenhime, Chief Financial Officer of Neoforma, Inc., Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
32.1   Certification of Robert J. Zollars, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Neoforma, Inc., Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.
32.2   Certification of Andrew L. Guggenhime, Chief Financial Officer of Neoforma, Inc., Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350.

* Confidential treatment has been requested for portions of this exhibit.

 

33