e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
x |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For
the quarterly period ended October 2, 2010
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from
to
Commission file number 0-15867
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC.
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
77-0148231 |
(State or Other Jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
Incorporation or Organization) |
|
Identification No.) |
|
|
|
2655 Seely Avenue, Building 5, San Jose, California
|
|
95134 |
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)
|
|
(Zip Code) |
(408) 943-1234
Registrants Telephone Number, including Area Code
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 has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes X No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer, and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
Large
accelerated filer [ X ]
|
Accelerated
filer [ ]
|
Non-accelerated filer [ ]
|
Smaller
reporting company [ ]
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Exchange Act). Yes No X
On
October 2, 2010, 267,211,463 shares of the registrants common stock, $0.01 par value, were
outstanding.
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC.
INDEX
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Financial Statements
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands)
(Unaudited)
ASSETS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
January 2, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
509,035 |
|
|
$ |
569,115 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
2,641 |
|
|
|
2,184 |
|
Receivables, net of allowances of $10,833 and $14,020, respectively |
|
|
202,237 |
|
|
|
200,628 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
28,486 |
|
|
|
24,165 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other |
|
|
79,910 |
|
|
|
54,655 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
822,309 |
|
|
|
850,747 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation of
$641,805 and $637,107, respectively |
|
|
290,103 |
|
|
|
311,502 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
158,893 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Acquired intangibles, net of accumulated amortization of $98,173
and $124,507, respectively |
|
|
185,866 |
|
|
|
28,841 |
|
Installment contract receivables, net of allowances of $0 and $9,724,
respectively |
|
|
28,231 |
|
|
|
58,448 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
220,546 |
|
|
|
161,049 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
1,705,948 |
|
|
$ |
1,410,587 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
|
$ |
152,436 |
|
|
$ |
150,207 |
|
Current portion of deferred revenue |
|
|
308,591 |
|
|
|
247,691 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
461,027 |
|
|
|
397,898 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-Term Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term portion of deferred revenue |
|
|
96,439 |
|
|
|
92,298 |
|
Convertible notes |
|
|
548,093 |
|
|
|
436,012 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
304,402 |
|
|
|
376,006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total long-term liabilities |
|
|
948,934 |
|
|
|
904,316 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contingencies (Notes 8 and 13) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock and capital in excess of par value |
|
|
1,706,590 |
|
|
|
1,674,396 |
|
Treasury stock, at cost |
|
|
(353,289 |
) |
|
|
(431,310 |
) |
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(1,100,111 |
) |
|
|
(1,177,983 |
) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
42,797 |
|
|
|
43,270 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
295,987 |
|
|
|
108,373 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities and Stockholders Equity |
|
$ |
1,705,948 |
|
|
$ |
1,410,587 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
1
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In thousands, except per share amounts)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenue: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product |
|
$ |
118,221 |
|
|
$ |
96,932 |
|
|
$ |
338,053 |
|
|
$ |
286,295 |
|
Services |
|
|
23,945 |
|
|
|
26,669 |
|
|
|
75,123 |
|
|
|
83,684 |
|
Maintenance |
|
|
95,768 |
|
|
|
92,521 |
|
|
|
273,760 |
|
|
|
262,374 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
|
237,934 |
|
|
|
216,122 |
|
|
|
686,936 |
|
|
|
632,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs and Expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product |
|
|
10,757 |
|
|
|
6,405 |
|
|
|
23,172 |
|
|
|
23,828 |
|
Cost of services |
|
|
19,102 |
|
|
|
21,139 |
|
|
|
62,583 |
|
|
|
69,602 |
|
Cost of maintenance |
|
|
9,960 |
|
|
|
11,105 |
|
|
|
31,839 |
|
|
|
35,423 |
|
Marketing and sales |
|
|
76,065 |
|
|
|
68,282 |
|
|
|
222,340 |
|
|
|
214,603 |
|
Research and development |
|
|
97,275 |
|
|
|
88,049 |
|
|
|
278,585 |
|
|
|
273,394 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
25,081 |
|
|
|
28,732 |
|
|
|
64,973 |
|
|
|
101,311 |
|
Amortization of acquired intangibles |
|
|
4,459 |
|
|
|
2,726 |
|
|
|
9,701 |
|
|
|
8,694 |
|
Restructuring and other charges (credits) |
|
|
(1,682 |
) |
|
|
(175 |
) |
|
|
(3,073 |
) |
|
|
17,833 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total costs and expenses |
|
|
241,017 |
|
|
|
226,263 |
|
|
|
690,120 |
|
|
|
744,688 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(3,083 |
) |
|
|
(10,141 |
) |
|
|
(3,184 |
) |
|
|
(112,335 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
(10,476 |
) |
|
|
(7,278 |
) |
|
|
(25,879 |
) |
|
|
(21,592 |
) |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
(2,907 |
) |
|
|
2,917 |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
(5,765 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before provision (benefit) for income
taxes |
|
|
(16,466 |
) |
|
|
(14,502 |
) |
|
|
(29,096 |
) |
|
|
(139,692 |
) |
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
|
|
(143,219 |
) |
|
|
(455 |
) |
|
|
(192,671 |
) |
|
|
11,969 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
126,753 |
|
|
$ |
(14,047 |
) |
|
$ |
163,575 |
|
|
$ |
(151,661 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income (loss) per share |
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
0.63 |
|
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted net income (loss) per share |
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
0.62 |
|
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares
outstanding basic |
|
|
258,606 |
|
|
|
259,193 |
|
|
|
261,122 |
|
|
|
256,792 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares
outstanding diluted |
|
|
263,302 |
|
|
|
259,193 |
|
|
|
265,383 |
|
|
|
256,792 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
2
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC.
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Period |
|
$ |
569,115 |
|
|
$ |
568,255 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Operating Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
|
163,575 |
|
|
|
(151,661 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
64,795 |
|
|
|
71,334 |
|
Amortization of debt discount and fees |
|
|
18,331 |
|
|
|
15,557 |
|
Loss on extinguishment of debt |
|
|
5,321 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
32,817 |
|
|
|
43,690 |
|
Loss from equity method investments |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
369 |
|
(Gain) loss on investments, net |
|
|
(5,133 |
) |
|
|
4,307 |
|
Gain on sale of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
(799 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
Write-down of investment securities |
|
|
1,500 |
|
|
|
5,207 |
|
Impairment of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
491 |
|
|
|
6,603 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(70,617 |
) |
|
|
(6,520 |
) |
Proceeds from the sale of receivables, net |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
5,827 |
|
Provisions (recoveries) for losses (gains) on trade and installment contract
receivables |
|
|
(13,339 |
) |
|
|
18,668 |
|
Other non-cash items |
|
|
2,259 |
|
|
|
(4,084 |
) |
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effect of acquired businesses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Receivables |
|
|
(44,422 |
) |
|
|
56,444 |
|
Installment contract receivables |
|
|
97,818 |
|
|
|
122,302 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
(16,005 |
) |
|
|
2,846 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other |
|
|
(23,828 |
) |
|
|
(4,041 |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
(32,223 |
) |
|
|
11,809 |
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |
|
|
3,308 |
|
|
|
(79,395 |
) |
Deferred revenue |
|
|
45,229 |
|
|
|
(83,760 |
) |
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
(87,054 |
) |
|
|
(10,773 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
142,129 |
|
|
|
24,729 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Investing Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from the sale of available-for-sale securities |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
139 |
|
Proceeds from the sale of long-term investments |
|
|
10,276 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Proceeds from the sale of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
900 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
(28,940 |
) |
|
|
(30,504 |
) |
Purchases of software licenses |
|
|
(2,706 |
) |
|
|
(774 |
) |
Investment in venture capital partnerships and equity investments |
|
|
(3,000 |
) |
|
|
(2,300 |
) |
Cash paid in business combinations and asset acquisitions, net of cash acquired |
|
|
(256,117 |
) |
|
|
(14,126 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used for investing activities |
|
|
(279,587 |
) |
|
|
(47,565 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Financing Activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal payments on receivable sale financing |
|
|
(3,540 |
) |
|
|
(2,467 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of 2015 Notes |
|
|
350,000 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Payment of Convertible Senior Notes |
|
|
(187,150 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
Payment of 2015 Notes issuance costs |
|
|
(10,419 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
Purchase of 2015 Notes Hedges |
|
|
(76,635 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
Proceeds from termination of Convertible Senior Notes Hedges |
|
|
280 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Proceeds from sale of 2015 Warrants |
|
|
37,450 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Tax effect related to employee stock transactions allocated to equity |
|
|
(9,624 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock |
|
|
13,269 |
|
|
|
27,862 |
|
Stock received for payment of employee taxes on vesting of restricted stock |
|
|
(5,875 |
) |
|
|
(4,055 |
) |
Purchases of treasury stock |
|
|
(39,997 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities |
|
|
67,759 |
|
|
|
21,340 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
9,619 |
|
|
|
3,858 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(60,080 |
) |
|
|
2,362 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Period |
|
$ |
509,035 |
|
|
$ |
570,617 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
3
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC.
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
NOTE 1. BASIS OF PRESENTATION
The Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
have been prepared by Cadence Design Systems, Inc., or Cadence, without audit, pursuant to the
rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. Certain information
and footnote disclosures normally included in consolidated financial statements prepared in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles have been condensed or omitted pursuant to
such rules and regulations. However, Cadence believes that the disclosures contained in this
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q comply with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, for a Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and are
adequate to make the information presented not misleading. These Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements are meant to be, and should be, read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial
Statements and the Notes thereto included in Cadences Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal
year ended January 2, 2010.
The unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q reflect all adjustments (which include only normal, recurring adjustments and those items
discussed in these Notes) that are, in the opinion of management, necessary to state fairly the
results, financial position and cash flows for the periods and dates presented. The results for
such periods are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full fiscal year.
Preparation of the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect
the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities
at the date of the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and the reported amounts of revenues
and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Cadence adopted new disclosure requirements related to the fair value of Cadences financial
instruments on the first day of fiscal 2010. This adoption did not have a material impact on
Cadences consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows. See Note 5 for
these disclosures.
Cadence has evaluated subsequent events through the date of issuance of the unaudited
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
NOTE 2. CONVERTIBLE NOTES
2.625% Cash Convertible Senior Notes Due 2015
In June 2010, Cadence issued $350.0 million principal amount of its 2.625% Cash Convertible
Senior Notes Due 2015, or the 2015 Notes. The 2015 Notes have a stated interest rate of 2.625%,
mature on June 1, 2015 and may be settled only in cash. The indenture for the 2015 Notes does not
contain any financial covenants. Contractual interest payable on the 2015 Notes began accruing in
June 2010 and is payable semi-annually each December 1st and June 1st. The initial purchasers
transaction fees and expenses totaling $10.6 million were capitalized as deferred financing costs
and will be amortized over the term of the 2015 Notes using the effective interest method. An
aggregate of $187.2 million of the net proceeds was used to purchase $100.0 million principal
amount of Cadences 1.375% Convertible Senior Notes Due December 15, 2011, or the 2011 Notes, and
$100.0 million principal amount of its 1.500%
4
Convertible Senior Notes Due December 15, 2013, or the 2013 Notes, and collectively with the
2011 Notes, the Convertible Senior Notes. Cadence also used $40.0 million of the net proceeds to
repurchase approximately 6.5 million shares of Cadence common stock.
Prior to March 1, 2015, holders may convert their 2015 Notes into cash upon the occurrence of
one of the following events:
|
|
|
The price of Cadences common stock reaches $9.81 during certain periods of
time specified in the 2015 Notes; |
|
|
|
|
Specified corporate transactions occur; or |
|
|
|
|
The trading price of the 2015 Notes falls below 98% of the product of (i)
the last reported sale price of Cadences common stock and (ii) the conversion rate on
that date. |
From March 1, 2015 and until the close of business on the second scheduled trading day
immediately preceding the maturity date, holders may convert their 2015 Notes into cash at any
time, regardless of the foregoing circumstances. Cadence may not redeem the 2015 Notes prior to
maturity.
The initial cash conversion rate for the 2015 Notes is 132.5205 shares of Cadence common stock
per $1,000 principal amount of 2015 Notes, equivalent to a cash conversion price of approximately
$7.55 per share of Cadence common stock, with the amount due on conversion payable in cash. Upon
cash conversion, a holder will receive the sum of the daily settlement amounts, calculated on a
proportionate basis for each day, during a specified observation period following the cash
conversion date.
If a fundamental change occurs prior to maturity and Cadences stock price is greater than
$6.16 per share at that time, the cash conversion rate will increase by an additional amount of up
to 29.8171 shares of Cadences common stock per $1,000 principal amount of 2015 Notes, which amount
would be paid entirely in cash to each holder that elects to convert its 2015 Notes at that time. A
fundamental change is any transaction or event (whether by means of an exchange offer, liquidation,
tender offer, consolidation, merger, combination, reclassification, recapitalization or otherwise)
in which more than 50% of Cadences common stock is exchanged for, converted into, acquired for or
constitutes solely the right to receive, consideration. No fundamental change will have occurred if
at least 90% of the consideration received consists of shares of common stock, or depositary
receipts representing such shares, that are:
|
|
|
Listed on, or immediately after the transaction or event will be listed on,
a United States national securities exchange; or |
|
|
|
|
Approved, or immediately after the transaction or event will be approved,
for quotation on a United States system of automated dissemination of quotations of
securities prices similar to the NASDAQ National Market prior to its designation as a
national securities exchange. |
As of October 2, 2010, none of the conditions allowing the holders of the 2015 Notes to
convert the 2015 Notes into cash had been met.
The cash conversion feature of the 2015 Notes, or the 2015 Notes Embedded Conversion
Derivative, requires bifurcation from the 2015 Notes and the 2015 Notes Embedded Conversion
Derivative is accounted for as a derivative liability, which is included in Other long-term
liabilities in Cadences Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. The fair value of the 2015 Notes
Embedded Conversion Derivative at the time of issuance of the 2015 Notes was $76.6 million, and was
recorded as the original debt discount for purposes of accounting for the debt component of the
2015 Notes. This discount will be recognized as interest expense using the effective interest
method over the term of the 2015 Notes. The estimated fair value of the 2015 Notes Embedded
Conversion Derivative, as of October 2, 2010 was $114.3 million.
5
Concurrently with the issuance of the 2015 Notes, Cadence entered into hedge transactions, or
the 2015 Notes Hedges, with various parties whereby Cadence has the option to receive the cash
equivalent of approximately 46.4 million shares of Cadences common stock at a price of
approximately $7.55 per share, subject to certain conversion rate adjustments in the 2015 Notes.
These options expire on June 1, 2015 and must be settled in cash. The aggregate cost of the 2015
Notes Hedges was $76.6 million. The 2015 Notes Hedges are accounted for as derivative assets, and
are included in Other assets in Cadences Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet. The estimated fair
value of the 2015 Notes Hedges, as of October 2, 2010, was $114.3 million.
The 2015 Notes Embedded Conversion Derivative and the 2015 Notes Hedges are adjusted to fair
value each reporting period and unrealized gains and losses are reflected in Cadences Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations. As the fair values of the 2015 Notes Embedded Conversion
Derivative and the 2015 Notes Hedges are similar, there was no impact to Cadences Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations relating to these adjustments to fair value during the three
months ended October 2, 2010.
In separate transactions, Cadence also sold warrants, or the 2015 Warrants, to various parties
for the purchase of up to approximately 46.4 million shares of Cadences common stock at a price of
$10.78 per share in a private placement pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, or the Securities Act. The 2015 Warrants expire on various dates from September 2015 through
December 2015 and must be settled in net shares. Cadence received $37.5 million in cash proceeds
from the sale of the 2015 Warrants, which has been recorded as an increase in Stockholders equity.
Changes in the fair value of the 2015 Warrants will not be recognized in Cadences Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements as long as the instruments remain classified as equity. The
2015 Warrants are included in diluted earnings per share to the extent the impact is dilutive.
The principal amount, unamortized debt discount and net carrying amount of the liability
component of the 2015 Notes as of October 2, 2010 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal amount of 2015 Notes |
|
$ |
350,000 |
|
Unamortized debt discount of 2015 Notes |
|
|
(72,848 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Net liability of 2015 Notes |
|
$ |
277,152 |
|
|
|
|
|
The effective interest rate, contractual interest expense and amortization of debt discount
for the 2015 Notes for the
three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except percentages) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective interest rate |
|
|
8.1% |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
|
|
8.1% |
|
|
|
N/A |
|
Contractual interest expense |
|
$ |
2,289 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
2,716 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
Amortization of debt discount |
|
$ |
3,196 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
3,788 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
6
As of October 2, 2010, the if-converted value of the 2015 Notes exceeded the principal amount
of the 2015 Notes. The total fair value of the 2015 Notes was $414.8 million.
1.375% Convertible Senior Notes Due December 15, 2011 and 1.500% Convertible Senior Notes Due
December 15, 2013
In December 2006, Cadence issued $250.0 million principal amount of its 2011 Notes and $250.0
million principal amount of its 2013 Notes. The indentures for the Convertible Senior Notes do not
contain any financial covenants. Contractual interest payable on the Convertible Senior Notes began
accruing in December 2006 and is payable semi-annually each December 15th and June 15th. In June
2010, Cadence repurchased $100.0 million principal amount of its 2011 Notes and $100.0 million
principal amount of its 2013 Notes, resulting in a remaining principal balance of $150.0 million
for the 2011 Notes and $150.0 million for the 2013 Notes.
Holders may convert their Convertible Senior Notes prior to maturity upon the occurrence of
one of the following events:
|
|
|
The price of Cadences common stock reaches $27.50 during certain periods of
time specified in the Convertible Senior Notes; |
|
|
|
|
Specified corporate transactions occur; or |
|
|
|
|
The trading price of the Convertible Senior Notes falls below 98% of the
product of (i) the last reported sale price of Cadences common stock and (ii) the
conversion rate on that date. |
From November 2, 2011, in the case of the 2011 Notes, and November 1, 2013, in the case of the
2013 Notes, and until the close of business on the scheduled trading day immediately preceding the
maturity date, holders may convert their Convertible Senior Notes at any time, regardless of the
foregoing circumstances. Cadence may not redeem the Convertible Senior Notes prior to maturity.
The initial conversion rate for the Convertible Senior Notes is 47.2813 shares of Cadence
common stock per $1,000 principal amount of Convertible Senior Notes, equivalent to a conversion
price of approximately $21.15 per share of Cadence common stock. Upon conversion, a holder will
receive the sum of the daily settlement amounts, calculated on a proportionate basis for each day,
during a specified observation period following the conversion date. The daily settlement amount
during each date of the observation period consists of:
|
|
|
Cash up to the principal amount of the note; and |
|
|
|
|
Cadences common stock to the extent that the conversion value exceeds the
amount of cash paid upon conversion of the Convertible Senior Notes. |
If a fundamental change occurs prior to maturity and Cadences stock price is greater than
$18.00 per share at that time, the conversion rate will increase by an additional amount of up to
$8.27 per share, which amount would be paid entirely in cash to each holder that elects to convert
its Convertible Senior Notes at that time. A fundamental change is any transaction or event
(whether by means of an exchange offer, liquidation, tender offer, consolidation, merger,
combination, reclassification, recapitalization or otherwise) in which more than 50% of Cadences
common stock is exchanged for, converted into, acquired for or constitutes solely the right to
receive, consideration. No fundamental change will have occurred if at least 90% of the
consideration received consists of shares of common stock, or depositary receipts representing such
shares, that are:
7
|
|
|
Listed on, or immediately after the transaction or event will be listed on,
a United States national securities exchange; or |
|
|
|
|
Approved, or immediately after the transaction or event will be approved,
for quotation on a United States system of automated dissemination of quotations of
securities prices similar to the NASDAQ National Market prior to its designation as a
national securities exchange. |
As of October 2, 2010, none of the conditions allowing the holders of the Convertible Senior
Notes to convert had been met.
In connection with the issuance of the 2015 Notes, an aggregate of $187.2 million of the net
proceeds were used to purchase in the open market $100.0 million principal amount of the 2011 Notes
and $100.0 million principal amount of the 2013 Notes. At settlement, the fair value of the
liability component immediately prior to its extinguishment is measured first and the difference
between the fair value of the aggregate consideration remitted to its holders and the fair value of
the liability component immediately prior to its extinguishment is attributed to the reacquisition
of the equity component. The components of the repurchase and related loss on early extinguishment
of debt are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011 Notes |
|
|
2013 Notes |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal amount repurchased |
|
$ |
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
200,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount allocated to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Extinguishment of liability component |
|
$ |
95,865 |
|
|
$ |
85,751 |
|
|
$ |
181,616 |
|
Extinguishment of equity component |
|
|
2,285 |
|
|
|
3,249 |
|
|
|
5,534 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cash paid for repurchase |
|
$ |
98,150 |
|
|
$ |
89,000 |
|
|
$ |
187,150 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal amount repurchased |
|
$ |
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
100,000 |
|
|
$ |
200,000 |
|
Unamortized debt discount |
|
|
(6,958 |
) |
|
|
(15,036 |
) |
|
|
(21,994 |
) |
Extinguishment of liability component |
|
|
(95,865 |
) |
|
|
(85,751 |
) |
|
|
(181,616 |
) |
Related debt issuance costs |
|
|
(676 |
) |
|
|
(1,035 |
) |
|
|
(1,711 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on early extinguishment of debt |
|
$ |
(3,499 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,822 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,321 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Concurrently with the issuance of the Convertible Senior Notes, Cadence entered into hedge
transactions, or the Convertible Senior Notes Hedges, with various parties whereby Cadence had the
option to purchase up to 23.6 million shares of Cadences common stock at a price of $21.15 per
share, subject to adjustment. The aggregate cost of the Convertible Senior Notes Hedges was $119.8
million and has been recorded as a reduction to Stockholders equity. In connection with the
purchase of a portion of the Convertible Senior Notes in June 2010, Cadence also sold a portion of
the Convertible Senior Notes Hedges representing options to purchase approximately 9.5 million
shares of Cadences common stock and received proceeds of $0.4 million. The estimated fair value of
the remaining Convertible Senior Notes Hedges was $1.2 million as of October 2, 2010. These options
expire on December 15, 2011, in the case of the 2011 Notes, and December 15, 2013, in the case of
the 2013 Notes, and must be settled in net shares. Subsequent changes in the fair value of the
Convertible Senior Notes Hedges will not be recognized in Cadences Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements as long as the instruments remain classified as equity.
In separate transactions, Cadence also sold warrants, or the Convertible Senior Notes
Warrants, to various parties for the purchase of up to 23.6 million shares of Cadences common
stock at a price of $31.50 per share in a private placement pursuant to Section 4(2) of the
Securities Act. Cadence received $39.4 million in cash
proceeds from the sale of the Convertible Senior Notes Warrants, which has been recorded as an
increase in Stockholders equity. In connection with the purchase of a portion of the Convertible
Senior Notes in June 2010, Cadence also purchased a portion of the
8
Convertible Senior Notes Warrants, reducing the number of shares of Cadence common stock
available for purchase by 9.5 million shares at a cost of $0.1 million. The Convertible Senior
Notes Warrants expire on various dates from February 2012 through April 2012 in the case of the
2011 Notes, and February 2014 through April 2014 in the case of the 2013 Notes, and must be settled
in net shares. Changes in the fair value of the Convertible Senior Notes Warrants will not be
recognized in Cadences Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements as long as the instruments
remain classified as equity. The remaining warrants are included in diluted earnings per share to
the extent the impact is dilutive.
The carrying amount of the equity component of the Convertible Senior Notes and the principal
amount, unamortized debt discount and net carrying amount of the liability component of the
Convertible Senior Notes as of October 2, 2010 and January 2, 2010 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
January 2, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity component of Convertible Senior Notes |
|
$ |
111,459 |
|
|
$ |
116,993 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal amount of Convertible Senior Notes |
|
$ |
300,000 |
|
|
$ |
500,000 |
|
Unamortized debt discount of Convertible Senior Notes |
|
|
(29,241 |
) |
|
|
(64,166 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liability component of Convertible Senior Notes |
|
$ |
270,759 |
|
|
$ |
435,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The effective interest rate, contractual interest expense and amortization of debt discount
for the Convertible Senior
Notes for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except percentages) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective interest rate |
|
|
6.3% |
|
|
|
6.3% |
|
|
|
6.3% |
|
|
|
6.3% |
|
Contractual interest expense |
|
$ |
1,075 |
|
|
$ |
1,791 |
|
|
$ |
4,515 |
|
|
$ |
5,373 |
|
Amortization of debt discount |
|
$ |
3,130 |
|
|
$ |
4,902 |
|
|
$ |
12,931 |
|
|
$ |
14,503 |
|
As of October 2, 2010, the if-converted value of the Convertible Senior Notes does not exceed
the principal amount of the Convertible Senior Notes and the total fair value of the Convertible
Senior Notes, including the equity component, was $284.5 million.
NOTE 3. ACQUISITIONS
For each of the acquisitions described below, the results of operations and the estimated fair
value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed have been included in Cadences Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements from the date of the acquisition.
Denali Software, Inc.
In June 2010, Cadence acquired Denali Software, Inc., or Denali®. Denali was a
privately-held provider of electronic design automation software and intellectual property used in
system-on-chip design and verification. Cadence acquired Denali to expand its portfolio to provide
system component modeling and IP integration. The aggregate initial purchase price was $296.8
million, which was paid in cash. An additional $12.6 million of payments were deferred on the
acquisition date and will be paid in cash if certain
9
Denali shareholders remain employees of Cadence during the periods specified in the respective
agreements. Of the $12.6 million, $5.3 million was expensed in Cadences Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations during the three months ended October 2, 2010 and $6.0 million was
expensed in Cadences Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations during the nine months ended
October 2, 2010. The remaining amounts will be expensed in Cadences Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations over the stated retention periods. As of October 2, 2010 $0.5 million of
the $12.6 million has been paid. The $152.2 million of goodwill recorded in connection with this
acquisition is not expected to be deductible for income tax purposes. This acquisition does not
include any contingent consideration that is subject to performance metrics, milestone achievement
or other similar criteria.
The following table summarizes the allocation of the purchase price for Denali and the
estimated amortization period for the acquired intangibles:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets |
|
$ |
59,398 |
|
Property, plant and equipment |
|
|
347 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
283 |
|
Acquired intangibles: |
|
|
|
|
Existing technology (six to nine-year weighted-average useful lives) |
|
|
65,700 |
|
Agreements and relationships (three to twelve-year weighted-average useful lives) |
|
|
98,800 |
|
Tradenames / trademarks / patents (ten-year weighted-average useful life) |
|
|
4,300 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
152,172 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets acquired |
|
|
381,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities |
|
|
(17,042 |
) |
Long-term deferred tax liabilities (Note 8) |
|
|
(67,153 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Net assets acquired |
|
$ |
296,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
Denalis current assets, property, plant and equipment and other assets were reviewed and
adjusted to their fair value on the date of acquisition, as necessary. Among the current assets
acquired, $46.7 million was cash and cash equivalents and $11.1 million was trade receivables.
The fair values of Denalis intangible assets were determined using the income approach with
significant inputs that are not observable in the market. Key assumptions include the expected
future cash flows, the timing of the expected future cash flows and the discount rates consistent
with the level of risk.
Denalis current liabilities were reviewed and adjusted to their fair value on the date of
acquisition, as necessary. Included in net current liabilities is deferred revenue, which
represents advance payments from customers. Cadence estimated its obligation related to the
deferred revenue using the cost build-up approach. The cost build-up approach determines fair value
by estimating the costs relating to supporting the obligation plus an assumed profit. The sum of
the costs and assumed profit approximates the amount that Cadence would be required to pay a third
party to assume the obligation. The estimated costs to fulfill the obligation were based on the
projected cost structure to provide the contractual deliverables. As a result, Cadence recorded
deferred revenue of $11.3 million, representing Cadences estimate of the fair value of the
contractual obligations assumed.
The financial information in the table below summarizes the combined results of operations of
Cadence and Denali, on a pro forma basis, as though the companies had been combined as of the
beginning of the fiscal years of the periods presented. The pro forma financial information is
presented for informational purposes only and is not indicative of the results of operations that
would have been achieved if the acquisition had taken place on January 3, 2010 or January 4, 2009
or of results that may occur in the future.
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
237,934 |
|
|
$ |
223,435 |
|
|
$ |
698,831 |
|
|
$ |
650,569 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
131,549 |
|
|
$ |
(18,732 |
) |
|
$ |
143,057 |
|
|
$ |
(178,516 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Because Cadence recorded deferred taxes of $66.7 million, primarily related to the intangible
assets acquired with Denali, Cadence released a corresponding amount of its deferred tax asset
valuation allowance. The $66.7 million release of the valuation allowance was recognized as a
benefit for income taxes during the nine months ended October 2, 2010. The pro forma net income
(loss) presented above does not include this non-recurring benefit for income taxes. The pro forma
tax effects were calculated considering Cadences valuation allowance position on its United States
losses and tax credits. See Note 8 for additional details of Cadences income taxes.
Other Acquisition
During the nine months ended October 2, 2010, Cadence acquired another company and recorded
$3.9 million of Goodwill and $2.2 million of intangible assets. The $3.9 million of goodwill
recorded in connection with this acquisition is not expected to be deductible for income tax
purposes. Of the $2.2 million of intangible assets, $0.5 million was allocated to in-process
research and development and is classified as an indefinite-lived intangible asset until the
project is completed or abandoned. The remaining $1.7 million of intangible assets has a weighted
average life of 5 years. The fair value of the intangible assets was determined using the income
approach with significant inputs that are not observable in the market. Key assumptions include the
expected future cash flows, the timing of the expected future cash flows and discount rates
consistent with the level of risk.
This acquisition includes contingent consideration payments based on future financial measures
of the acquired technology. Cadence makes estimates regarding the fair value of contingent
consideration liabilities on the acquisition date and at the end of each reporting period until the
contingency is resolved. Cadence estimates the fair value of these liabilities based on Cadences
expectations as to the projected levels of business and Cadences assessment of the probability of
achievement. Cadence believes that its estimates and assumptions are reasonable, but there is
significant judgment involved. Changes in the fair value of contingent consideration liabilities
subsequent to the acquisition are recorded in General and administrative expense in Cadences
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The contingent consideration arrangement requires payments of up to $4.0 million if certain
financial measures are met during the three-year period subsequent to the consummation of the
acquisition. This contingent consideration arrangement does not require continuing employment of
the selling shareholders. The initial fair value of the contingent consideration arrangement of
$0.8 million was determined using the income approach with significant inputs that are not
observable in the market. Key assumptions include discount rates consistent with the level of risk
of achievement and probability-adjusted revenue amounts. The expected outcomes were recorded at net
present value. The fair value of this contingent consideration was $0.9 million as of October 2,
2010.
Acquisition-Related Contingent Consideration
Cadence accounts for business combinations with acquisition dates on or before January 3, 2009
under the purchase method in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standard, or SFAS,
No. 141, Business Combinations, and contingent consideration is added to Goodwill as it is paid.
During the nine months ended October 2, 2010, Cadence recorded $2.8 million of Goodwill in
connection with
11
acquisitions accounted for under SFAS No. 141. Cadence accounts for business combinations with
acquisition dates after January 3, 2009 under the acquisition method in accordance with the
Accounting Standards Codification and contingent consideration is recorded at fair value on the
acquisition date as noted above.
In connection with Cadences acquisitions completed before October 2, 2010, Cadence may be
obligated to pay up to an aggregate of $16.4 million in cash (including the up to $4.0 million in
cash referred to in Other Acquisition above) during the next 30 months if certain defined
performance goals are achieved in full, of which $9.5 million would be expensed in its Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations.
NOTE 4. GOODWILL AND ACQUIRED INTANGIBLES
Goodwill
Cadence completed its annual goodwill impairment test during the three months ended October 2,
2010 and determined that the fair value of Cadences single reporting unit substantially exceeded
the carrying amount of its net assets and that no impairment existed.
The changes in the carrying amount of goodwill during the nine months ended October 2, 2010
were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Carrying |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of January 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
---- |
|
Goodwill resulting from acquisitions during the period (Note 3) |
|
|
156,103 |
|
Additions due to contingent consideration (Note 3) |
|
|
2,790 |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of October 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
158,893 |
|
|
|
|
|
Acquired Intangibles, net
Acquired intangibles with finite lives as of October 2, 2010 were as follows, excluding
intangibles that were fully amortized as of January 2, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Carrying |
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
Acquired |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amortization |
|
|
Intangibles, net |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Existing technology and backlog |
|
$ |
91,800 |
|
|
$ |
(25,154 |
) |
|
$ |
66,646 |
|
Agreements and relationships |
|
|
135,456 |
|
|
|
(33,682 |
) |
|
|
101,774 |
|
Distribution rights |
|
|
30,100 |
|
|
|
(21,823 |
) |
|
|
8,277 |
|
Tradenames, trademarks and patents |
|
|
26,183 |
|
|
|
(17,514 |
) |
|
|
8,669 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total acquired intangibles |
|
$ |
283,539 |
|
|
$ |
(98,173 |
) |
|
$ |
185,366 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of October 2, 2010, Cadence also had $0.5 million of in-process research and development
intangibles that will have an indefinite useful life until they are placed into service or the
associated research and development efforts are abandoned.
12
Acquired intangibles with finite lives as of January 2, 2010 were as follows, excluding
intangibles that were fully amortized as of January 3, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross Carrying |
|
|
Accumulated |
|
|
Acquired |
|
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Amortization |
|
|
Intangibles, net |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Existing technology and backlog |
|
$ |
64,900 |
|
|
$ |
(61,332 |
) |
|
$ |
3,568 |
|
Agreements and relationships |
|
|
35,364 |
|
|
|
(27,905 |
) |
|
|
7,459 |
|
Distribution rights |
|
|
30,100 |
|
|
|
(19,565 |
) |
|
|
10,535 |
|
Tradenames, trademarks and patents |
|
|
22,984 |
|
|
|
(15,705 |
) |
|
|
7,279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total acquired intangibles |
|
$ |
153,348 |
|
|
$ |
(124,507 |
) |
|
$ |
28,841 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of acquired intangibles for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and
October 3, 2009 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product |
|
$ |
2,196 |
|
|
$ |
620 |
|
|
$ |
3,407 |
|
|
$ |
3,721 |
|
Cost of maintenance |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
1,045 |
|
|
|
1,045 |
|
|
|
3,135 |
|
Amortization of acquired intangibles |
|
|
4,459 |
|
|
|
2,726 |
|
|
|
9,701 |
|
|
|
8,694 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total amortization of acquired
intangibles |
|
$ |
6,665 |
|
|
$ |
4,391 |
|
|
$ |
14,153 |
|
|
$ |
15,550 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of costs from existing technology is included in Cost of product. Amortization
of costs from acquired maintenance contracts is included in Cost of maintenance.
Estimated amortization expense for the following fiscal years and thereafter is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 remaining period |
|
$ |
6,747 |
|
2011 |
|
|
25,488 |
|
2012 |
|
|
23,455 |
|
2013 |
|
|
19,981 |
|
2014 |
|
|
17,206 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
92,489 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total estimated amortization expense |
|
$ |
185,366 |
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE 5. FAIR VALUE OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
Inputs to valuation techniques are observable or unobservable. Observable inputs reflect
market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect Cadences market
assumptions. These two types of inputs have created the following fair-value hierarchy:
|
|
|
Level 1 Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets; |
|
|
|
|
Level 2 Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets,
quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active, and
model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs and significant value drivers
are observable in active markets; and |
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one
or more significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable. |
13
This hierarchy requires Cadence to minimize the use of unobservable inputs and to use
observable market data, if available, when determining fair value. Cadence recognizes transfers
between levels of this hierarchy based on the fair values of the respective financial instruments
at the end of the reporting period in which the transfer occurred. There were no transfers between
levels of the fair value hierarchy during the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010.
The fair value of Cadences cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments, receivables,
accounts payable and foreign currency forward exchange contracts approximate their carrying value
due to the short-term nature of these instruments. The fair value of Cadences long-term
investments and installment contract receivables approximate their carrying values based upon
current market rates of interest. The fair values of Cadences 2015 Notes and Convertible Senior
Notes are influenced by interest rates and Cadences stock price and stock price volatility and are
determined by market trading. The fair values of Cadences 2015 Notes Hedges and the 2015 Notes
Embedded Conversion Derivative are determined using an option pricing model based on observable
inputs, including Cadences stock price, stock price volatility
and risk-free interest rates. See
Note 2 for additional details on Cadences 2015 Notes, 2015 Notes Hedges, 2015 Notes Embedded
Conversion Derivative, and Convertible Senior Notes.
On a quarterly basis, Cadence measures at fair value certain financial assets and liabilities.
The fair value of financial assets and liabilities was determined using the following levels of
inputs as of October 2, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements as of October 2, 2010: |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents Money market funds |
|
$ |
414,175 |
|
|
$ |
414,175 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
Available-for-sale securities |
|
|
2,416 |
|
|
|
2,416 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Trading securities held in
Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation
Plan (NQDC) |
|
|
26,105 |
|
|
|
26,105 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
---- |
|
2015 Notes Hedges |
|
|
114,254 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
114,254 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Foreign currency exchange contracts |
|
|
1,858 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
1,858 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Time deposits |
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
559,032 |
|
|
$ |
442,920 |
|
|
$ |
116,112 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition-related contingent consideration |
|
$ |
930 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
930 |
|
2015 Notes Embedded Conversion Derivative |
|
|
114,254 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
114,254 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities |
|
$ |
115,184 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
114,254 |
|
|
$ |
930 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The 2015 Notes Hedges, foreign currency forward exchange contracts and the 2015 Notes Embedded
Conversion Derivative are classified as Level 2 because these assets and liabilities are not
actively traded and are valued using standard pricing methodologies that use observable market data
for all inputs.
14
The fair value of these financial assets and liabilities was determined using the following
levels of inputs as of January 2, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements as of January 2, 2010: |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents Money market funds |
|
$ |
446,335 |
|
|
$ |
446,335 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
Available-for-sale securities |
|
|
1,951 |
|
|
|
1,951 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Time deposits |
|
|
233 |
|
|
|
233 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Trading securities held in NQDC |
|
|
31,403 |
|
|
|
31,403 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets |
|
$ |
479,922 |
|
|
$ |
479,922 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
Level 1 |
|
|
Level 2 |
|
|
Level 3 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency exchange contracts |
|
$ |
478 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
478 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities |
|
$ |
478 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
478 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cadence acquired intangible assets of $171.0 million in connection with business combinations
during the nine months ended October 2, 2010. The fair value of these intangible assets was
estimated using Level 3 inputs. See Note 3 for additional details of these business combinations
and the key inputs used in the valuations.
Cadence recorded the initial fair value of contingent consideration liabilities in connection
with a business combination during the nine months ended October 2, 2010. This liability will be
measured at fair value at the end of each reporting period. See Note 3 for additional details of
this business combination and the key inputs used in the valuation.
Cadence vacated certain facilities in connection with a restructuring plan and recorded lease
losses of $0.5 million during the nine months ended October 2, 2010, which are included in
Restructuring and other charges (credits) in Cadences Condensed Consolidated Statement of
Operations. The fair value of these lease losses was estimated using Level 2 inputs. See Note 6
for additional details on Cadences lease loss estimates.
NOTE 6. RESTRUCTURING AND OTHER CHARGES
During the second quarter of fiscal 2009, Cadence initiated a restructuring plan, or the 2009
Restructuring Plan, and during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009, Cadence determined that it would
initiate further actions under the 2009 Restructuring Plan. During fiscal 2008, Cadence initiated a
restructuring plan, or the 2008 Restructuring Plan, and Cadence also initiated restructuring plans
in each year from 2001 through 2005, which are referred to as the Other Restructuring Plans.
Cadence initiated the 2009 Restructuring Plan, 2008 Restructuring Plan, and Other Restructuring
Plans, collectively known as the Restructuring Plans, in an effort to operate more efficiently.
As of October 2, 2010, Cadences total amount accrued for the Restructuring Plans was $6.1
million, consisting of $5.6 million of estimated lease losses and $0.5 million of severance and
severance-related benefits. The estimated lease losses will be adjusted in the future based on
changes in the assumptions used to estimate the lease losses. The lease losses could be as high as
$9.3 million and will be influenced by rental rates and the amount of time it takes to find
suitable tenants to sublease the facilities. Of the $6.1 million accrued as of October 2, 2010,
$1.4 million was included in Accounts payable and accrued liabilities and $4.7 million was included
in Other long-term liabilities on Cadences Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet.
15
Cadence regularly evaluates the adequacy of its lease loss, severance and related benefits
accruals, and adjusts the balances based on actual costs incurred or changes in estimates and
assumptions. Cadence may incur future charges to reflect actual costs incurred or for changes in
estimates related to amounts previously recorded under the Restructuring Plans.
2009 Restructuring Plan
Cadence has recorded total costs associated with the 2009 Restructuring Plan of $32.1 million.
These costs include severance payments, severance-related benefits and costs for outplacement
services that were communicated to the affected employees before January 2, 2010, and estimated
severance payments and related benefits that were both probable and estimable as of January 2, 2010
for employees notified after January 2, 2010.
Cadence recorded a net credit of $1.7 million during the three months ended October 2, 2010,
and a net credit of $3.6 million during the nine months ended October 2, 2010, due to severance and
related benefits costs that were less than previously estimated. Cadence also recorded charges of
$0.4 million related to facilities that Cadence vacated during the nine months ended October 2,
2010 and $0.1 million for assets related to these vacated facilities.
Total severance and termination benefits of approximately $30.5 million were paid to employees
before October 2, 2010. Approximately $0.4 million of severance and termination benefits will be
paid after October 2, 2010, all of which is included in Accounts payable and accrued liabilities in
Cadences Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of October 2, 2010. Due to varying regulations in
the jurisdictions and countries in which Cadence operates, Cadence expects substantially all
termination benefits to be paid by April 3, 2011.
The following table presents activity associated with the 2009 Restructuring Plan for the
three months ended October 2, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and |
|
|
Excess |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits |
|
|
Facilities |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, July 3, 2010 |
|
$ |
2,508 |
|
|
$ |
394 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
2,902 |
|
Restructuring and other charges
(credits), net |
|
|
(1,720 |
) |
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(1,757 |
) |
Non-cash charges |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Cash payments |
|
|
(434 |
) |
|
|
(159 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(593 |
) |
Effect of foreign currency translation |
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, October 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
447 |
|
|
$ |
200 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
647 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16
The following table presents activity associated with the 2009 Restructuring Plan for the nine
months ended October 2, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and |
|
|
Excess |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits |
|
|
Facilities |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, January 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
18,638 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
18,638 |
|
Restructuring and other charges
(credits), net |
|
|
(3,573 |
) |
|
|
418 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
(3,073 |
) |
Non-cash charges (credits) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
(82 |
) |
|
|
(76 |
) |
Cash payments |
|
|
(14,192 |
) |
|
|
(224 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(14,416 |
) |
Effect of foreign currency translation |
|
|
(426 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(426 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, October 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
447 |
|
|
$ |
200 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
647 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2008 Restructuring Plan
The following table presents activity associated with the 2008 Restructuring Plan for the
three months ended October 2, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and |
|
|
Excess |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits |
|
|
Facilities |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, July 3, 2010 |
|
$ |
57 |
|
|
$ |
1,430 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
1,492 |
|
Restructuring and other charges
(credits), net |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Non-cash charges |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
19 |
|
Cash payments |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(168 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(172 |
) |
Effect of foreign currency translation |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, October 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
44 |
|
|
$ |
1,352 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
1,401 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table presents activity associated with the 2008 Restructuring Plan for the nine
months ended October 2, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and |
|
|
Excess |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits |
|
|
Facilities |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, January 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
287 |
|
|
$ |
1,874 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
2,166 |
|
Restructuring and other charges
(credits), net |
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(83 |
) |
Non-cash charges |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
Cash payments |
|
|
(169 |
) |
|
|
(526 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(695 |
) |
Effect of foreign currency translation |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(70 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, October 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
44 |
|
|
$ |
1,352 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
1,401 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
Other Restructuring Plans
The following table presents activity associated with the Other Restructuring Plans for the
three months ended October 2, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excess |
|
|
|
Facilities |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, July 3, 2010 |
|
$ |
3,794 |
|
Restructuring and other charges (credits), net |
|
|
66 |
|
Non-cash charges |
|
|
35 |
|
Cash payments |
|
|
(135 |
) |
Effect of foreign currency translation |
|
|
252 |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, October 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
4,012 |
|
|
|
|
|
The following table presents activity associated with the Other Restructuring Plans for the
nine months ended July 3, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excess |
|
|
|
Facilities |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, January 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
4,648 |
|
Restructuring and other charges (credits), net |
|
|
83 |
|
Non-cash charges |
|
|
151 |
|
Cash payments |
|
|
(721 |
) |
Effect of foreign currency translation |
|
|
(149 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance, October 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
4,012 |
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE 7. ALLOWANCE FOR DOUBTFUL ACCOUNTS
Cadence analyzes the creditworthiness of its customers, historical experience, changes in
customer demand, and the overall economic climate in the industries that Cadence serves, makes
judgments as to its ability to collect outstanding receivables, and provides allowances for the
portion of receivables when collection is not probable. Provisions are made based upon a specific
review of customer receivables and are recorded in operating expenses. Receivables and Installment
contract receivables are presented net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $10.8 million as of
October 2, 2010 and $23.7 million as of January 2, 2010.
Cadences customers are primarily concentrated within the semiconductor sector, which was
adversely affected by the 2008 and 2009 economic downturn. As of October 2, 2010, approximately
one-third of Cadences total Receivables, net and Installment contract receivables, net were
attributable to the ten customers with the largest balances of Receivables, net and Installment
contract receivables, net. As of January 2, 2010, approximately half of Cadences total
Receivables, net and Installment contract receivables, net were attributable to the ten customers
with the largest balances of Receivables, net and Installment contract receivables, net.
Cadence believes that its allowance for doubtful accounts is adequate, but Cadence will
continue to monitor customer liquidity and other economic conditions, which may result in changes
to Cadences estimates regarding its allowance for doubtful accounts. The adequacy of the allowance
for doubtful accounts is evaluated by Cadence at least quarterly, and any adjustments to the
allowance for doubtful accounts resulting from these evaluations could be material to Cadences
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
18
NOTE 8. INCOME TAXES
Cadence determined that uncertain tax positions that were subject to the Internal Revenue
Service, or IRS, examination of Cadences federal income tax returns for the tax years 2000 through
2002 were effectively settled during the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010. Cadence
recognized a benefit for income taxes of $143.2 million during the three months ended October 2,
2010, including the impact of the effective settlement. Cadence recognized a benefit for income
taxes of $192.7 million during the nine months ended
October 2, 2010, including the impact of the
effective settlement and the $66.7 million release of the deferred tax asset valuation allowance
primarily resulting from the increase in deferred tax liabilities from the intangible assets acquired with
Denali. Cadence also recorded an increase in its Prepaid expenses and other assets of $14.4 million
because of the effective settlement.
During the three months ended October 2, 2010, Cadence decreased Common stock and capital in
excess of par by approximately $9.7 million for taxes related to employee stock transactions that
should have been recognized during fiscal 2007. Cadence recognized the $9.7 million payment as Tax
effect related to employee stock transactions allocated to equity in its Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Cash Flows for the nine months ended October 2,
2010, but should have recognized this
payment during fiscal 2007. Cadence also recognized $3.6 million of provision for income taxes
during the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 for uncertain tax positions that should have
been recognized during fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2009. The effect of the
tax payment and the provision for income taxes on Cadences
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and
on Cadences Consolidated Financial Statements for fiscal 2007, fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2009 is not
considered material.
Internal Revenue Service Examinations
The IRS and other tax authorities regularly examine Cadences income tax returns. Cadences
federal income tax returns beginning with the 2000 tax year remain subject to examination by the
IRS. Cadences California state income tax returns beginning with the 2001 tax year remain subject
to examination by the California Franchise Tax Board.
In July 2006, the IRS completed its field examination of Cadences federal income tax returns
for the tax years 2000 through 2002 and issued a Revenue Agents Report, or RAR, in which the IRS
proposed to assess an aggregate tax deficiency for the three-year period of approximately $324.0
million. In November 2006, the IRS revised the proposed aggregate tax deficiency for the three-year
period to be approximately $318.0 million. In October 2010, the Appeals Office of the IRS, or the
Appeals Office provided Cadence with copies of the settlement agreements that were executed by the
Appeals Office in August 2010 that resolve the previously disputed tax positions. While Cadence did
not receive the final IRS determination of the amount that will be owed by Cadence, Cadence
considers the tax positions to be effectively settled, because the IRS has completed its
examination procedures and Cadence believes that there is a remote possibility that the IRS will
re-examine the settled tax positions. As a result of this effective settlement Cadence recognized a
benefit for income taxes of $148.3 million in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations
for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010.
In May 2009, the IRS completed its field examination of Cadences federal income tax returns
for the tax years 2003 through 2005 and issued a RAR, in which the IRS proposed to assess an
aggregate deficiency for the three-year period of approximately $94.1 million. In August 2009, the
IRS revised the proposed aggregate tax deficiency for the three-year period to approximately $60.7
million. The IRS is contesting Cadences transfer pricing arrangements with its foreign
subsidiaries and deductions for foreign trade income. The IRS made similar claims against Cadences
transfer pricing arrangements and deductions
19
for foreign trade income in prior examinations. Cadence has filed a timely protest with the
IRS and is seeking resolution of the issues through the Appeals Office.
Cadence believes that the proposed IRS adjustments are inconsistent with applicable tax laws
and Cadence is vigorously challenging these proposed adjustments. The RAR is not a final Statutory
Notice of Deficiency, but the IRS imposes interest on the proposed deficiencies until the matters
are resolved. Interest is compounded daily at rates that are published by the IRS, are adjusted
quarterly and have been at an annual rate between 4% and 10% since 2001.
The IRS is currently examining Cadences federal income tax returns for the tax years 2006
through 2008.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
Cadence takes a two-step approach to recognizing and measuring uncertain tax positions. The
first step is to evaluate the tax position for recognition by determining if the weight of
available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not the tax position will be sustained
upon audit, including resolution of any related appeals or litigation processes. The second step is
to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely of being realized
upon effective settlement.
The changes in Cadences gross amount of unrecognized tax benefits during the nine months
ended October 2, 2010 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized Tax |
|
|
|
Benefits |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized tax benefits as of January 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
324,837 |
|
Amount of the decreases in
unrecognized tax benefits of tax positions
taken during a prior year |
|
|
(130,484 |
) |
Amount of the increases in unrecognized tax
benefits as a result of tax positions taken
during the current year |
|
|
7,594 |
|
Amount of decreases in unrecognized tax
benefits relating to settlements with
taxing authorities |
|
|
(75,038 |
) |
Amount of reductions to unrecognized tax
benefits resulting from the lapse of the
applicable statute of limitations |
|
|
(109 |
) |
Effect of foreign currency translation |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized tax benefits as of October 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
126,779 |
|
|
|
|
|
As
of October 2, 2010, $80.7 million of the unrecognized tax benefits
would affect our effective tax rate if recognized upon resolution of
the uncertain tax positions.
The total amount of interest and penalties recognized in the Consolidated Statements of
Operations for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 as income tax expense (benefit) is $(47.2)
million and $3.4 million, respectively.
The total amounts of gross accrued interest and penalties recognized in the Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of October 2, 2010, were $32.8 million and $14.0 million,
respectively.
Cadence believes that it is reasonably possible that the total amount of unrecognized tax
benefits related to the IRS examination of its federal income tax returns for the tax years 2003
through 2005 could decrease during fiscal 2010 if Cadence is able to effectively settle the
disputed issues with the Appeals Office. Cadence cannot currently provide an estimate of the range
of possible outcomes.
20
In addition, Cadence believes that it is reasonably possible that the total amounts of
unrecognized tax benefits for its transfer pricing arrangements with its foreign subsidiaries could
significantly increase or decrease during fiscal 2010 if the Appeals Office develops new settlement
guidelines or adjusts its settlement positions that change Cadences measurement of the tax
benefits to be recognized upon effective settlement with the IRS. Because of the uncertain impact
of any potential settlement guidelines, Cadence cannot currently provide an estimate of the range
of possible outcomes.
The calculation of Cadences Provision (benefit) for income taxes requires significant
judgment and involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex tax laws and
regulations. In determining the adequacy of the provision (benefit) for income taxes, Cadence
regularly assesses the potential settlement outcomes resulting from income tax examinations.
However, the final outcome of tax examinations, including the total amount payable or the timing of
any such payments upon resolution of these issues, cannot be estimated with certainty. In addition,
Cadence cannot be certain that such amount will not be materially different from the amount that is
reflected in its historical income tax provisions and accruals. Should the IRS or other tax
authorities assess additional taxes as a result of a current or a future examination, Cadence may
be required to record charges to operations in future periods that could have a material impact on
its results of operations, financial position or cash flows in the applicable period or periods.
NOTE 9. NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE
Basic net income (loss) per share is computed by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted
average number of shares of common stock outstanding, less unvested restricted stock awards, during
the period. None of Cadences outstanding grants of restricted stock contain nonforfeitable
dividend rights. Diluted net income per share is impacted by equity instruments considered to be
potential common shares, if dilutive, computed using the treasury stock method of accounting. In
periods in which a net loss is recorded, potentially dilutive equity instruments would decrease the
loss per share and therefore are not added to the weighted average shares outstanding for the
diluted net loss per share calculation.
The calculation for basic and diluted net income (loss) per share for the three and nine
months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share amounts) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
126,753 |
|
|
$ |
(14,047 |
) |
|
$ |
163,575 |
|
|
$ |
(151,661 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares used to
calculate basic net income (loss) per
share |
|
|
258,606 |
|
|
|
259,193 |
|
|
|
261,122 |
|
|
|
256,792 |
|
2023 Notes |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Options |
|
|
1,678 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
1,409 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Restricted stock |
|
|
2,945 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
2,801 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Employee stock purchase plan (ESPP) |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares used to
calculate diluted net income (loss) per
share |
|
|
263,302 |
|
|
|
259,193 |
|
|
|
265,383 |
|
|
|
256,792 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income (loss) per share |
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
0.63 |
|
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted net income (loss) per share |
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
$ |
(0.05 |
) |
|
$ |
0.62 |
|
|
$ |
(0.59 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21
The following table presents the potential shares of Cadences common stock outstanding for
the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 that were not included in the
computation of diluted net income (loss) per share because the effect of including these shares
would have been anti-dilutive:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options to purchase shares of common
stock (various expiration dates
through 2020) |
|
|
21,350 |
|
|
|
37,657 |
|
|
|
22,789 |
|
|
|
37,657 |
|
Non-vested shares of restricted stock |
|
|
1,412 |
|
|
|
9,630 |
|
|
|
2,056 |
|
|
|
9,630 |
|
Employee stock purchase plan (ESPP) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
544 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
544 |
|
2023 Notes |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Convertible Senior Notes Warrants
(various expiration dates through
2014) |
|
|
14,184 |
|
|
|
23,640 |
|
|
|
14,184 |
|
|
|
23,640 |
|
2015 Warrants (various expiration
dates through 2015) |
|
|
46,382 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
46,382 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total potential common shares excluded |
|
|
83,328 |
|
|
|
71,482 |
|
|
|
85,411 |
|
|
|
71,482 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NOTE 10. ACCUMULATED DEFICIT
The changes in accumulated deficit for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of July 3, 2010 |
|
$ |
(1,215,391 |
) |
Net income |
|
|
126,753 |
|
Re-issuance of treasury stock |
|
|
(11,473 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance as of October 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
(1,100,111 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance as of January 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
(1,177,983 |
) |
Net income |
|
|
163,575 |
|
Re-issuance of treasury stock |
|
|
(85,703 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance as of October 2, 2010 |
|
$ |
(1,100,111 |
) |
|
|
|
|
When treasury stock is reissued at a price higher than its cost, the difference is recorded as
a component of Capital in excess of par in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. When treasury
stock is reissued at a price lower than its cost, the difference is recorded as a component of
Capital in excess of par to the extent that there are treasury stock gains to offset the losses. If
there are no treasury stock gains in Capital in excess of par, the losses upon re-issuance of
treasury stock are recorded as a component of Accumulated deficit in the Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheets.
22
NOTE 11. STOCK REPURCHASE PROGRAMS
Cadences Board of Directors has authorized the following programs to repurchase shares of
Cadences common stock in the open market, which remained in effect on October 2, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining |
|
Authorization Date |
|
Amount |
|
|
Authorization |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
February 2008 |
|
$ |
500,000 |
|
|
$ |
314,389 |
|
August 2008 |
|
$ |
500,000 |
|
|
|
500,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total remaining authorization |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
814,389 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The shares repurchased under Cadences stock repurchase programs and the total cost of
repurchased shares during the nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009 were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine |
|
|
|
Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares repurchased |
|
|
6,493 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Total cost of repurchased shares |
|
$ |
39,997 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
NOTE 12. OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME (LOSS)
Other comprehensive income (loss) includes foreign currency translation gains and losses and
unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale marketable securities, net of related tax
effects. These items have been excluded from net income and are reflected instead in Stockholders
Equity. Cadences comprehensive income (loss) for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010
and October 3, 2009 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) |
|
$ |
126,753 |
|
|
$ |
(14,047 |
) |
|
$ |
163,575 |
|
|
$ |
(151,661 |
) |
Foreign currency translation
gain, net of related tax effects |
|
|
7,552 |
|
|
|
4,141 |
|
|
|
3,639 |
|
|
|
2,772 |
|
Changes in unrealized holding
gains (losses) on
available-for-sale securities,
net of reclassification
adjustment for realized gains
and losses, net of related tax
effects |
|
|
(239 |
) |
|
|
(544 |
) |
|
|
465 |
|
|
|
1,082 |
|
Changes in defined benefit plan
liabilities, net of related tax
effects |
|
|
(4,675 |
) |
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
(4,576 |
) |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income (loss) |
|
$ |
129,391 |
|
|
$ |
(10,307 |
) |
|
$ |
163,103 |
|
|
$ |
(147,699 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the three months ended October 2, 2010, Cadence recorded an adjustment to the minimum
pension liability related to a defined benefit plan, which resulted in a decrease of $4.7 million
in other comprehensive income.
23
NOTE 13. CONTINGENCIES
Legal Proceedings
From time to time, Cadence is involved in various disputes and litigation that arise in the
ordinary course of business. These include disputes and lawsuits related to intellectual property,
mergers and acquisitions, licensing, contracts, distribution arrangements and employee relations
matters. At least quarterly, Cadence reviews the status of each significant matter and assesses its
potential financial exposure. If the potential loss from any claim or legal proceeding is
considered probable and the amount or the range of loss can be estimated, Cadence accrues a
liability for the estimated loss. Legal proceedings are subject to uncertainties, and the outcomes
are difficult to predict. Because of such uncertainties, accruals are based on Cadences judgments
using the best information available at the time. As additional information becomes available,
Cadence reassesses the potential liability related to pending claims and litigation matters and may
revise its estimates.
During fiscal 2008, three complaints were filed in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, or District Court, all alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, on behalf of a purported class of
purchasers of Cadences common stock. The first such complaint was filed on October 29, 2008,
captioned Hu v. Cadence Design Systems, Inc., Michael J. Fister, William Porter and Kevin S.
Palatnik; the second such complaint was filed on November 4, 2008, captioned Vyas v. Cadence Design
Systems, Inc., Michael J. Fister, and Kevin S. Palatnik; and the third such complaint was filed on
November 21, 2008, captioned Collins v. Cadence Design Systems, Inc., Michael J. Fister, John B.
Shoven, Kevin S. Palatnik and William Porter. On March 4, 2009, the District Court entered an order
consolidating these three complaints and captioning the consolidated case In re Cadence Design
Systems, Inc. Securities Litigation. The District Court also named a lead plaintiff and lead
counsel for the consolidated litigation. The lead plaintiff filed its consolidated amended
complaint on April 24, 2009, naming Cadence, Michael J. Fister, Kevin S. Palatnik, William Porter
and Kevin Bushby as defendants, and alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange
Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, on behalf of a purported class of purchasers of
Cadences common stock who traded Cadences common stock between April 23, 2008 and December 10,
2008, or the Alleged Class Period. The amended complaint alleged that Cadence and the individual
defendants made statements during the Alleged Class Period regarding Cadences financial results
that were false and misleading because Cadence had recognized revenue that should have been
recognized in subsequent periods. The amended complaint requested certification of the action as a
class action, unspecified damages, interest and costs, and unspecified equitable relief. On June 8,
2009, Cadence and the other defendants filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint. On
September 11, 2009, the District Court held that the plaintiffs had failed to allege a valid claim
under the relevant legal standards, and granted the defendants motion to dismiss the amended
complaint. The District Court gave the plaintiffs leave to file another amended complaint, and the
plaintiffs did so on October 13, 2009. The amended complaint filed on October 13, 2009 names the
same defendants, asserts the same causes of action, and seeks the same relief as the earlier
amended complaint. Cadence moved to dismiss the October 13, 2009 amended complaint. The District
Court denied the motion to dismiss on March 2, 2010. On July 7, 2010, the parties agreed, and the
District Court ordered, that the litigation be stayed in order to facilitate mediation. This
litigation remains stayed while the parties continue participating in the mediation process. If
this mediation process is unsuccessful and the litigation is not resolved through a negotiated
settlement, Cadence plans to continue to vigorously defend these consolidated cases and any other
securities lawsuits that may be filed.
During fiscal 2008, two derivative complaints were filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court,
or Superior Court. The first was filed on November 20, 2008, and captioned Ury Priel, derivatively
on behalf of nominal defendant Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. John B. Shoven, Lip-Bu Tan, Alberto
Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, Donald L. Lucas, Sr., Roger Siboni, George Scalise, Michael J. Fister, and
Doe Defendants 1-
24
15. The second was filed on December 1, 2008, and captioned Mark Levine, derivatively on
behalf of nominal defendant Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. John B. Shoven, Lip-Bu Tan, Alberto
Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, Donald L. Lucas, Sr., Roger Siboni, George Scalise, Michael J. Fister,
John Swainson and Doe Defendants 1-10. These complaints purport to bring suit derivatively, on
behalf of Cadence, against certain of Cadences current and former directors for alleged breach of
fiduciary duty, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets and unjust
enrichment. Many of the allegations underlying these claims are similar or identical to the
allegations in the consolidated securities class action lawsuits described above, and the claims
also include allegations that the individual defendants approved compensation based on inflated
financial results. The plaintiffs request unspecified damages, restitution, equitable relief and
their reasonable attorneys fees, experts fees, costs and expenses on behalf of Cadence against
the individual defendants. A motion to consolidate these complaints was granted on January 20,
2009, and the cases were captioned In re Cadence Design Systems, Inc. Derivative Litigation. The
consolidated cases were then stayed by agreement of the parties. The plaintiffs filed a
consolidated amended derivative complaint on June 1, 2010. The consolidated amended derivative
complaint names as defendants Cadence (as a nominal defendant), James S. Miller, R.L. Smith
McKeithen, John B. Shoven, Lip-Bu Tan, Alberto Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, Donald L. Lucas, Sr., Roger
S. Siboni, George Scalise, Michael J. Fister, John A.C. Swainson, Kevin S. Palatnik, William
Porter, and Kevin Bushby. The consolidated amended derivative complaint alleges purported causes
of action for breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate
assets, and unjust enrichment (which is asserted against certain defendants). Many of the factual
allegations of the consolidated amended derivative complaint are similar to those alleged in the
First Amended Complaint in the securities class action case described above. In addition, the
claims include allegations that the director defendants made inappropriate personnel decisions with
respect to the former officers and that the former officers were unjustly enriched. The
consolidated derivative complaint seeks unspecified monetary damages and equitable relief,
disgorgement of profits and compensation, and costs and attorneys fees.
On April 28, 2010, a derivative complaint was filed in the District Court, captioned Walter
Hamilton, derivatively on behalf of nominal defendant Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. Michael J.
Fister, William Porter, James S. Miller, Jr., Kevin Bushby, R.L. Smith McKeithen, Lip-Bu Tan,
Alberto Sangiovanni-Vincentelli, John B. Shoven, Donald L. Lucas, George M. Scalise, Roger S.
Siboni, John A.C. Swainson, and KPMG LLP. This complaint purports to bring suit derivatively, on
behalf of Cadence, against certain of Cadences current and former officers and directors for
breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets,
against the former executive defendants for unjust enrichment, and against Cadences independent
auditors for professional negligence and breach of contract. Many of the allegations underlying
these claims are similar or identical to the allegations in the consolidated securities class
action lawsuits described above. In addition, the claims include allegations that the director
defendants made inappropriate personnel decisions with respect to the former officers and that the
former officers were unjustly enriched, as well as allegations that Cadences independent auditors
performed allegedly inadequate audits. The complaint seeks unspecified monetary relief, injunctive
relief relating to certain corporate governance matters, and attorneys costs and fees. On June 28,
2010, the plaintiff dismissed Cadences independent auditors from the case, without prejudice.
On August 17, 2010, two complaints were filed in the District Court: one captioned George
Powers, derivatively on behalf of Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. Michael J. Fister, Kevin Bushby,
R.L. Smith McKeithen, James S. Miller, Jr., William Porter, James J. Cowie, Kevin S. Palatnik, John
B. Shoven, PhD, Donald L. Lucas and Roger S. Siboni; the other captioned Arash Samani,
derivatively on behalf of Cadence Design Systems, Inc. v. Michael J. Fister, Kevin Bushby, R.L.
Smith McKeithen, James S. Miller, Jr., William Porter, James J. Cowie, Kevin S. Palatnik, John B.
Shoven, PhD, Donald L. Lucas and Roger S. Siboni. These complaints are virtually identical to one
another, and purport to bring suit derivatively, on behalf of Cadence, against certain of Cadences
current and former officers and directors for breach of
25
fiduciary duty. Many of the allegations underlying this claim are similar or identical to the
allegations in the consolidated securities class action lawsuits described above. The complaints
seek unspecified monetary and equitable relief, as well as attorneys fees and costs.
The parties to the derivative cases pending in the Superior Court and to the Hamilton v.
Fister case agreed to participate in the mediation and to stay these derivative cases. These cases
remain stayed while the parties continue with the mediation process. The Powers v. Fister and
Samani v. Fister cases were also stayed by the district court. If these derivative cases do not
end in negotiated resolutions, Cadence will respond to the derivative complaints appropriately.
In light of the preliminary status of these lawsuits, Cadence cannot predict the outcome of
these matters. While the outcome of these litigation matters cannot be predicted with any
certainty, management does not believe that the outcome of any current matters will have a material
adverse effect on Cadences consolidated financial position, liquidity or results of operations.
Other Contingencies
Cadence provides its customers with a warranty on sales of hardware products, generally for a
90-day period. To date, Cadence has not incurred any significant costs related to warranty
obligations.
Cadences product license and services agreements typically include a limited indemnification
provision for claims from third parties relating to Cadences intellectual property. If the
potential loss from any indemnification claim is considered probable and the amount or the range of
loss can be estimated, Cadence accrues a liability for the estimated loss. The indemnification is
generally limited to the amount paid by the customer. To date, claims under such indemnification
provisions have not been significant.
NOTE 14. STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
The supplemental cash flow information for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October
3, 2009 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Paid During the Period for: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
3,594 |
|
|
$ |
3,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income taxes |
|
$ |
21,527 |
|
|
$ |
8,630 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the nine months ended October 2, 2010, Cadence paid $9.7 million of taxes related to
employee stock transactions. See Note 8 for further discussion of this payment.
26
NOTE 15. OTHER INCOME (EXPENSE), NET
Cadences Other income (expense), net, for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and
October 3, 2009 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
$ |
303 |
|
|
$ |
278 |
|
|
$ |
853 |
|
|
$ |
2,056 |
|
Gains on sale of non-marketable securities |
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
4,885 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Gains on sale of available-for-sale securities |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Gains (losses) on trading securities in the
non-qualified deferred compensation trust |
|
|
(1,931 |
) |
|
|
3,652 |
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
(4,339 |
) |
Gains (losses) on foreign exchange |
|
|
(1,285 |
) |
|
|
(881 |
) |
|
|
905 |
|
|
|
1,542 |
|
Equity losses from investments |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(138 |
) |
|
|
(105 |
) |
|
|
(369 |
) |
Write-down of investments |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(601 |
) |
|
|
(1,500 |
) |
|
|
(5,207 |
) |
Loss on early extinguishment of debt (Note 2) |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(5,321 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
Other income (expense) |
|
|
(91 |
) |
|
|
575 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
520 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense), net |
|
$ |
(2,907 |
) |
|
$ |
2,917 |
|
|
$ |
(33 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,765 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the nine months ended October 2, 2010, Cadence recorded gains totaling $4.9 million for
five cost method investments that were liquidated.
It is Cadences policy to review the fair value of its investment securities on a regular
basis to determine whether its investments in these companies are other-than-temporarily impaired.
This evaluation includes, but is not limited to, reviewing each companys cash position, financing
needs, earnings or revenue outlook, operational performance, management or ownership changes and
competition. If Cadence believes the carrying value of an investment is in excess of its fair
value, and this difference is other-than-temporary, it is Cadences policy to write down the
investment to reduce its carrying value to fair value.
Cadence determined that certain of its non-marketable securities were other-than-temporarily
impaired and Cadence wrote down the investments by $1.5 million during the nine months ended
October 2, 2010, $0.6 million during the three months ended October 3, 2009 and $5.2 million during
the nine months ended October 3, 2009.
NOTE 16. SEGMENT REPORTING
Segment reporting requires disclosures of certain information regarding reportable segments,
products and services, geographic areas of operation and major customers. Segment reporting is
based upon the management approach: how management organizes the companys reportable segments
for which separate financial information is (i) available and (ii) evaluated regularly by the chief
operating decision maker in deciding how to allocate resources and in assessing performance.
Cadences chief operating decision maker is its President and Chief Executive Officer, or CEO.
Cadences CEO reviews Cadences consolidated results as one reportable segment. In making operating
decisions, the CEO primarily considers consolidated financial information, accompanied by
disaggregated information about revenues by geographic region.
Outside the United States, Cadence markets and supports its products and services primarily
through its subsidiaries. Revenue is attributed to geography based on the country in which the
product is used or services are delivered. Long-lived assets are attributed to geography based on
the country where the assets are located.
27
The following table presents a summary of revenue by geography:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americas: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States |
|
$ |
97,577 |
|
|
$ |
87,926 |
|
|
$ |
274,874 |
|
|
$ |
263,877 |
|
Other Americas |
|
|
3,679 |
|
|
|
4,069 |
|
|
|
17,174 |
|
|
|
14,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Americas |
|
|
101,256 |
|
|
|
91,995 |
|
|
|
292,048 |
|
|
|
277,916 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe, Middle East and Africa: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany |
|
|
12,212 |
|
|
|
12,918 |
|
|
|
49,094 |
|
|
|
36,112 |
|
Other Europe, Middle East and Africa |
|
|
36,276 |
|
|
|
30,472 |
|
|
|
101,553 |
|
|
|
100,518 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Europe, Middle East and Africa |
|
|
48,488 |
|
|
|
43,390 |
|
|
|
150,647 |
|
|
|
136,630 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Japan |
|
|
47,245 |
|
|
|
50,218 |
|
|
|
130,121 |
|
|
|
125,594 |
|
Asia |
|
|
40,945 |
|
|
|
30,519 |
|
|
|
114,120 |
|
|
|
92,213 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
237,934 |
|
|
$ |
216,122 |
|
|
$ |
686,936 |
|
|
$ |
632,353 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of October 2, 2010, no single customer accounted for 10% or more of Cadences Receivables,
net and Installment contract receivables, net. As of January 2, 2010, one customer accounted for
15% of Cadences Receivables, net and Installment contract receivables, net.
The following table presents a summary of long-lived assets by geography:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
January 2, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Americas: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States |
|
$ |
260,125 |
|
|
$ |
282,002 |
|
Other Americas |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Americas |
|
|
260,139 |
|
|
|
282,027 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Europe, Middle East and Africa: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Germany |
|
|
793 |
|
|
|
1,060 |
|
Other Europe, Middle East and Africa |
|
|
4,723 |
|
|
|
5,216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Europe, Middle East and Africa |
|
|
5,516 |
|
|
|
6,276 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Japan |
|
|
4,521 |
|
|
|
5,130 |
|
Asia |
|
|
19,927 |
|
|
|
18,069 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
290,103 |
|
|
$ |
311,502 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements and notes thereto included in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, or this
Quarterly Report, and in conjunction with our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
January 2, 2010. Certain of these statements, including, but not limited to, statements regarding
the extent and timing of future revenues and expenses and customer demand, statements regarding the
deployment of our products, statements regarding our reliance on third parties and other statements
using words such as anticipates, believes, could, estimates, expects, forecasts,
intends, may, plans, projects, should, will and would, and words of similar import
and the negatives thereof, constitute forward-looking statements. These statements are predictions
based upon our current expectations about future events. Actual results could vary materially as a
result of certain factors, including, but not limited to, those expressed in these statements. We
refer you to the Risk Factors, Results of Operations, Disclosures About Market Risk, and
Liquidity and Capital Resources sections contained in this Quarterly Report, and the risks
discussed in our other Securities Exchange Commission, or SEC, filings, which identify important
risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained
in the forward-looking statements.
We urge you to consider these factors carefully in evaluating the forward-looking statements
contained in this Quarterly Report. All subsequent written or oral forward-looking statements
attributable to our company or persons acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their
entirety by these cautionary statements. The forward-looking statements included in this Quarterly
Report are made only as of the date of this Quarterly Report. We do not intend, and undertake no
obligation, to update these forward-looking statements.
Overview
We develop electronic design automation, or EDA, software, hardware and silicon intellectual
property, or IP. We license software and IP, sell or lease hardware technology, provide maintenance
for our software, IP and hardware and provide engineering and education services throughout the
world to help manage and accelerate product development processes for electronics. Our customers
use our products and services to design and develop complex integrated circuits, or ICs, and
electronics systems.
We primarily generate revenue from licensing our EDA software and IP, selling or leasing our
hardware technology, providing maintenance for our software and hardware and providing engineering
services. Substantially all of our revenue is generated from IC and electronics systems
manufacturers and designers and is dependent upon their commencement of new design projects. As a
result, our revenue is significantly influenced by our customers business outlook and investment
in the introduction of new products and the improvement of existing products.
During 2008 and 2009, the semiconductor industry suffered as the overall macroeconomic
environment deteriorated. Electronics companies faced financial challenges in 2008 and 2009 because
consumer spending on electronics was adversely affected by increased unemployment, and corporate
spending was restrained by the tightened credit market and the economic downturn. During 2009,
semiconductor unit volumes decreased and average selling prices declined. These factors affect how
electronics companies address traditional challenges of cost, quality, innovation and
time-to-market associated with highly complex electronics systems and IC product development.
Although estimates project growth for the semiconductor industry in 2010, we believe that increased spending on
EDA and other tools may grow more slowly than the semiconductor industry as a whole in 2010.
29
Facing uncertainty and cost pressures in their own businesses or otherwise as a result of the
recent economic downturn, some of our customers are continuing to wait to purchase our products and
to seek purchasing terms and conditions that are less favorable to us. As a result, we have
experienced low business levels and losses from operations in recent years. To enable us to keep
our focus on the value of our technology and to assist with customer demands, we are continuing our
transition to a license mix that will provide our customers with greater flexibility and will
result in a substantial portion of our revenue being recognized ratably.
Our customers may also experience adverse changes in their businesses and, as a result, may
delay or default on their payment obligations, file for bankruptcy or modify or cancel plans to
license our products. If our customers are not successful in generating sufficient cash or are
precluded from securing financing, they may not be able to pay, or may delay payment of, accounts
receivable that are owed to us, although these obligations are generally not cancelable.
Additionally, our customers may seek to renegotiate existing contractual commitments. Although we
have not yet experienced a material level of defaults, any material payment default by our
customers or significant reductions in existing contractual commitments could have a material
adverse effect on our financial condition and operating results.
Product performance and size specifications of the mobile and other consumer electronics
markets are requiring electronic systems to be smaller, consume less power and provide multiple
functions in one system-on-chip, or SoC, or system-in-package, or SiP. The design challenge is also
becoming more complex with each new generation of electronics because providers of EDA solutions
are required to deliver products that address these technical challenges and improve the efficiency
and productivity of the design process in a price-conscious environment.
With the addition of emerging nanometer design considerations to the already burgeoning set of
traditional design tasks, complex SoC or IC design can no longer be accomplished using a collection
of discrete design tools. What previously consisted of sequential design activities must be merged
and accomplished nearly simultaneously without time-consuming data translation steps. We combine
our design technologies into platforms addressing four major design activities: functional
verification, digital IC design, custom IC design and system interconnect design. The four Cadence®
design platforms are branded as Incisive® functional verification, Encounter® digital IC design,
Virtuoso® custom design and Allegro® system interconnect design. In addition, we augment these
offerings with a set of design for manufacturing, or DFM, products that service both the digital
and custom IC design flows. These four offerings, together with our DFM products, comprise our
primary product lines.
We have identified certain items that management uses as performance indicators to manage our
business, including revenue, certain elements of operating expenses and cash flow from operations,
and we describe these items further below under the heading Results of Operations and Liquidity
and Capital Resources.
Critical Accounting Estimates
In preparing our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, we make assumptions, judgments
and estimates that can have a significant impact on our revenue, operating income (loss) and net
income (loss), as well as on the value of certain assets and liabilities on our Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets. We base our assumptions, judgments and estimates on historical
experience and various other factors that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances.
Actual results could differ materially from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions. At least quarterly, we evaluate our
assumptions, judgments and estimates and make changes accordingly. Historically, our assumptions,
judgments and
30
estimates relative to our critical accounting estimates have not differed materially
from actual results. For further information about our critical accounting estimates, see the
discussion under the heading Critical Accounting Estimates in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended January 2, 2010.
Our critical accounting estimates for valuation of intangible assets, valuation of goodwill
and financial instruments and fair value are described below. These assumptions, judgments and
estimates became critical accounting estimates during the nine months ended October 2, 2010.
Valuation of Intangible assets
When we acquire businesses, we allocate the purchase price to acquired tangible assets and
liabilities and acquired identifiable intangible assets. Any residual purchase price is recorded as
goodwill. The allocation of the purchase price requires us to make significant estimates in
determining the fair values of these acquired assets and assumed liabilities, especially with
respect to intangible assets. These estimates are based on information obtained from management of
the acquired companies, our assessment of this information, and historical experience. These
estimates can include, but are not limited to, the cash flows that an asset is expected to generate
in the future, the appropriate weighted-average cost of capital, and the cost savings expected to
be derived from acquiring an asset. These estimates are inherently uncertain and unpredictable, and
if different estimates were used, the purchase price for the acquisition could be allocated to the
acquired assets and liabilities differently from the allocation that we have made. In addition,
unanticipated events and circumstances may occur that may affect the accuracy or validity of such
estimates, and if such events occur, we may be required to record a charge against the value
ascribed to an acquired asset or an increase in the amounts recorded for assumed liabilities.
We review for impairment long-lived assets, including certain identifiable intangibles,
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that we will not be able to recover an assets
carrying amount. In addition, we assess our long-lived assets for impairment if they are abandoned.
For long-lived assets to be held and used, including acquired intangibles, we initiate our
review whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of a
long-lived asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of an asset is measured by comparing its
carrying amount to the expected future undiscounted cash flows expected to result from the use and
eventual disposition of that asset, excluding future interest costs that would be recognized as an
expense when incurred. Any impairment to be recognized is measured by the amount by which the
carrying amount of the asset exceeds its fair market value. Significant management judgment is
required in:
|
|
|
Identifying a triggering event that arises from a change in circumstances; |
|
|
|
|
Forecasting future operating results; and |
|
|
|
|
Estimating the proceeds from the disposition of long-lived or intangible
assets. |
In future periods, material impairment charges could be necessary should different conditions
prevail or different judgments be made.
Valuation of Goodwill
Costs in excess of the fair value of tangible and other intangible assets acquired and
liabilities assumed in a business combination are recorded as goodwill. Goodwill is not amortized,
but instead is tested for impairment at least annually. We have evaluated goodwill on an annual basis and
whenever events and changes in circumstances suggest that the carrying amount may not be
recoverable.
31
Impairment of goodwill is tested at the reporting unit level by comparing the reporting units
carrying amount, including goodwill, to the fair value of the reporting unit. The fair values of
the reporting units are estimated using a combination of the income, or discounted cash flows,
approach and the market approach, which utilizes comparable companies data. If the carrying amount
of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, goodwill is considered to be impaired and a second
step is performed to measure the amount of the impairment loss.
The preparation of the goodwill impairment analysis requires management to make significant
estimates and assumptions with respect to the determination of fair values of reporting units and
tangible and intangible assets. These estimates and assumptions, which include future values, are
complex and often subjective and may differ significantly from period to period based on changes in
the overall economic environment, changes in our industry and changes in our strategy or our
internal forecasts. Estimates and assumptions with respect to the determination of the fair value
of our reporting unit include:
|
|
|
Control premium assigned to our market capitalization; |
|
|
|
|
Our operating forecasts; |
|
|
|
|
Revenue growth rates; |
|
|
|
|
Risk-commensurate discount rates and costs of capital; and |
|
|
|
|
Market multiples of revenue and earnings. |
These estimates and assumptions, along with others, are used to estimate the fair value of our
reporting unit as well as tangible and intangible assets. While we believe the estimates and
assumptions we used are reasonable, different assumptions may materially impact the resulting fair
value of the reporting unit, tangible assets and intangible assets, the amount of impairment we
record in any given period and our results of operations.
We completed our annual goodwill impairment test during the three months ended October 2, 2010
and determined that the fair value of our single reporting unit substantially exceeded the carrying
amount of our net assets and that no impairment existed.
Financial Instruments and Fair Value
Inputs to valuation techniques are observable or unobservable. Observable inputs reflect
market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect our market
assumptions. These two types of inputs have created the following fair-value hierarchy:
|
|
|
Level 1 Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets; |
|
|
|
|
Level 2 Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets,
quoted prices for identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active, and
model-derived valuations in which all significant inputs and significant value drivers
are observable in active markets; and |
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one
or more significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable. |
This hierarchy requires us to minimize the use of unobservable inputs and to use observable
market data, if available, when determining fair value. We recognize transfers between levels of
this hierarchy based on the fair values of the respective financial instruments at the end of the
reporting period in which the transfer occurred. Changes in fair value are recognized in earnings each period for financial
instruments that are carried at fair value.
32
The types of instruments that trade in markets that are not considered to be active, but are
valued based on quoted market prices, broker or dealer quotations, or alternative pricing sources
with reasonable levels of price transparency, are generally classified within Level 2 of the fair
value hierarchy.
In June 2010, we entered into hedge transactions, or the 2015 Notes Hedges, and recorded an
embedded conversion derivative, or the 2015 Notes Embedded Conversion Derivative, concurrent with
the issuance of the 2015 Notes. The fair values of these derivatives are determined using an option
pricing model based on observable inputs, such as implied volatility of our common stock, risk-free
interest rate and other factors, and as such are classified within Level 2 of the fair value
hierarchy. See Note 2 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details of
these transactions.
Certain instruments are classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy because they
trade infrequently and therefore have little or no price transparency. For those instruments that
are not traded in active markets or are subject to transfer restrictions, valuations are adjusted
to reflect illiquidity and/or non-transferability, and such adjustments are generally based on
available market evidence. In the absence of such evidence, our best estimate is used.
Results of Operations
Financial results for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the
three and nine months ended October 3, 2009, reflect the following:
|
|
|
Increased revenue recognized because of higher business levels due to the
timing of contract renewals with existing customers and from contracts executed in prior
quarters due to our continued transition to a ratable license mix, which began in the
third quarter of fiscal 2008; |
|
|
|
|
A decrease in our bad debt expense due to the prior year period increase in
our allowance for doubtful accounts as a result of our assessment of the increased risk
of customer delays or defaults on payment obligations and the current year release of a
portion of the reserve as a result of collections on certain receivables that were
previously included in our allowance for doubtful accounts; |
|
|
|
|
An increase in employee-related costs primarily resulting from improving
business levels as compared to fiscal 2009, partially offset by
decreased costs as a result of our prior year restructuring plans and other expense reductions; |
|
|
|
|
The acquisition of Denali Software, Inc., or Denali, including an increase
in deferred tax liabilities from the intangible assets acquired with Denali and the
resulting benefit for income taxes because of the release of valuation allowance against
our deferred tax assets; |
|
|
|
|
Effective settlement of the Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, examination of
our federal income tax returns for the tax years 2000 through 2002, which resulted in a
benefit for income taxes of $148.3 million; and |
|
|
|
|
The issuance of $350.0 million principal amount of our 2.625% Cash
Convertible Senior Notes Due 2015, or the 2015 Notes, and the repurchase of $100.0
million principal amount of our 1.375% Convertible Senior Notes Due December 15, 2011,
or the 2011 Notes, and $100.0 million principal amount of our 1.500% Convertible Senior
Notes Due December 15, 2013, or the 2013 Notes, and collectively with the 2011 Notes,
the Convertible Senior Notes. |
Acquisition of Denali
In June 2010, we acquired Denali, a privately-held provider of electronic design automation
software and intellectual property used in system-on-chip design and verification, for $296.8
million in cash. An additional $12.6 million of payments were deferred on the acquisition date and
will be paid in cash
33
if certain Denali shareholders remain employees of Cadence during the periods
specified in the respective agreements. Of the $12.6 million, $5.3 million was expensed in our
Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations during the three months ended October 2, 2010 and
$6.0 million was expensed in our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations during the nine
months ended October 2, 2010. The remaining amounts will be expensed in our Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations over the stated retention periods. As of October 2, 2010, $0.5 million of
the $12.6 million has been paid. Denalis product portfolio includes memory models, design IP and
verification IP. We acquired Denali to expand our portfolio to include memory sub-system modeling
and IP building blocks to facilitate SoC integration. We expect that the acquisition of Denali will
increase our costs more than our expected increase in revenue during the remainder of 2010.
Revenue
We primarily generate revenue from licensing our EDA software and IP, selling or leasing our
hardware technology, providing maintenance for our software, IP and hardware and providing
engineering services. We principally use three license types: subscription, term and perpetual. The
different license types provide a customer with different conditions of use for our products, such
as:
|
|
|
The right to access new technology; |
|
|
|
|
The duration of the license; and |
|
|
|
|
Payment timing. |
The timing of our product revenue is significantly affected by the mix of orders executed in
any given period. For some orders, such as subscription orders, product and maintenance revenue is
recognized ratably over multiple periods. In addition, depending on the individual facts and
circumstances of a particular order, we have some orders for which product and maintenance revenue
is recognized as payments become due and some for which revenue is only recognized when payment is
received. For other orders, all product revenue is recognized up-front in the same quarter in which
the order is executed.
We seek to achieve a mix of orders with approximately 90% of the total value of all executed
orders consisting of orders for which the revenue is recurring, or ratable in nature, with the
balance of the orders made up of orders for which the product revenue is recognized up-front.
During the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and the three and nine months ended October
3, 2009, approximately 90% of the total value of our executed orders was comprised of ratable
revenue orders.
Customer decisions regarding these aspects of license transactions determine the license type,
timing of revenue recognition and potential future business activity. For example, if a customer
chooses a fixed duration of use, this will result in either a subscription or term license. A
business implication of this decision is that, at the expiration of the license period, the
customer must decide whether to continue using the technology and therefore renew the license
agreement. Historically, larger customers generally used products from two or more of our five
product groups and rarely completely terminated their relationship with us upon expiration of the
license. See the discussion under the heading Critical Accounting Estimates Revenue Recognition
in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional descriptions of license types and timing of
revenue recognition.
34
Although we believe that pricing volatility has not generally been a material component of the
change in our revenue from period to period, we believe that the amount of revenue recognized in
future periods will depend on, among other things, the:
|
|
|
Competitiveness of our new technology; |
|
|
|
|
Timing of contract renewals with existing customers; |
|
|
|
|
Length of our sales cycle; and |
|
|
|
|
Size, duration, terms and type of: |
|
|
|
|
Contract renewals with existing customers; |
|
|
|
|
Additional sales to existing customers; and |
|
|
|
|
Sales to new customers. |
The value and duration of contracts, and consequently product revenue recognized, is affected
by the competitiveness of our products. Product revenue recognized in any period is also affected
by the extent to which customers purchase subscription, term or perpetual licenses, and the extent
to which contracts contain flexible payment terms.
Revenue Mix
We analyze our software and hardware businesses by product group, combining revenues for both
product and maintenance because of their interrelationship. We have formulated a design solution
strategy that combines our design technologies in platforms, as described in the various product
groups below.
Functional Verification: Products in this group, including the Incisive functional
verification platform and the Denali products, are used to verify that the high level, logical
representation of an IC design is functionally correct and for verification at the system and SoC
levels. Our emulation hardware products, verification IP products, memory sub-system models, and
silicon IP products are included in this product group.
Digital IC Design: Products in this group, including the Encounter digital IC design
platform, are used to accurately convert the high-level, logical representation of a digital IC
into a detailed physical blueprint and then detailed design information showing how the IC will be
physically implemented. This data is used for creation of the photomasks used to manufacture
semiconductors.
Custom IC Design: Our custom design products, including the Virtuoso custom design
platform, are used for ICs that must be designed at the transistor level, including analog, RF,
memory, high performance digital blocks and standard cell libraries. Detailed design information
showing how an IC will be physically implemented is used for creation of the photomasks used to
manufacture semiconductors.
System Interconnect Design: This product group consists of our PCB and IC package
design products, including the Allegro and OrCAD® products. The Allegro system interconnect design
platform enables consistent co-design of interconnects across ICs, IC packages and PCBs, while the
OrCAD line focuses on cost-effective, entry-level PCB solutions.
Design for Manufacturing: Included in this product group are our physical verification
and analysis products. These products are used to analyze and verify that the physical blueprint of
the IC has been constructed correctly and can be manufactured successfully. Our strategy includes
focusing on integrating DFM awareness into our core design platforms of Encounter digital IC design
and Virtuoso custom design.
35
Revenue by Period
The following table shows our revenue for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and
October 3, 2009 and the change in revenue between periods:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Product |
|
$ |
118.2 |
|
|
$ |
96.9 |
|
|
$ |
21.3 |
|
|
$ |
338.0 |
|
|
$ |
286.3 |
|
|
$ |
51.7 |
|
Services |
|
|
23.9 |
|
|
|
26.7 |
|
|
|
(2.8 |
) |
|
|
75.1 |
|
|
|
83.7 |
|
|
|
(8.6 |
) |
Maintenance |
|
|
95.8 |
|
|
|
92.5 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
273.8 |
|
|
|
262.4 |
|
|
|
11.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
237.9 |
|
|
$ |
216.1 |
|
|
$ |
21.8 |
|
|
$ |
686.9 |
|
|
$ |
632.4 |
|
|
$ |
54.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product revenue increased during the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010, as
compared to the three and nine months ended October 3, 2009, primarily because of higher business
levels due to the timing of contract renewals with existing customers and from contracts executed
in prior quarters due to our continued transition to a ratable license mix. Product and maintenance
revenue also increased as a result of our acquisition of Denali during the second fiscal quarter of
2010. Services revenue decreased during the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010, as
compared to the three and nine months ended October 3, 2009, primarily because of lower business
levels in the services business.
Revenue by Product Group
The following table shows for the past five consecutive quarters the percentage of product and
related maintenance revenue contributed by each of our five product groups, and Services and other:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
July 3, |
|
|
April 3, |
|
|
January 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Functional Verification |
|
|
25% |
|
|
|
26% |
|
|
|
22% |
|
|
|
22% |
|
|
|
21% |
|
Digital IC Design |
|
|
23% |
|
|
|
21% |
|
|
|
21% |
|
|
|
22% |
|
|
|
19% |
|
Custom IC Design |
|
|
24% |
|
|
|
26% |
|
|
|
27% |
|
|
|
28% |
|
|
|
28% |
|
System Interconnect |
|
|
10% |
|
|
|
10% |
|
|
|
9% |
|
|
|
11% |
|
|
|
11% |
|
Design for Manufacturing |
|
|
8% |
|
|
|
6% |
|
|
|
9% |
|
|
|
7% |
|
|
|
9% |
|
Services and other |
|
|
10% |
|
|
|
11% |
|
|
|
12% |
|
|
|
10% |
|
|
|
12% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As described under the heading Critical Accounting Estimates in our Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended January 2, 2010, certain of our licenses allow customers the
ability to remix among software products. Additionally, we have licensed a combination of our
products to customers with the actual product selection and number of licensed users to be
determined at a later date. For these arrangements, we estimate the allocation of the revenue to
product groups based upon the expected usage of our products by these customers. The actual usage
of our products by these customers may differ and, if that proves to be the case, the revenue
allocation in the above table would differ.
Although we believe the methodology of allocating revenue to product groups is reasonable,
there can be no assurance that such allocated amounts reflect the amounts that would result if the
customer had individually licensed each specific software solution at the outset of the
arrangement.
36
Revenue by Geography
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
United States |
|
$ |
97.6 |
|
|
$ |
87.9 |
|
|
$ |
9.7 |
|
|
$ |
274.9 |
|
|
$ |
263.9 |
|
|
$ |
11.0 |
|
Other Americas |
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
|
|
17.2 |
|
|
|
14.0 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
Europe, Middle East
and Africa |
|
|
48.5 |
|
|
|
43.4 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
150.6 |
|
|
|
136.7 |
|
|
|
13.9 |
|
Japan |
|
|
47.2 |
|
|
|
50.2 |
|
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
130.1 |
|
|
|
125.6 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
Asia |
|
|
40.9 |
|
|
|
30.5 |
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
|
|
114.1 |
|
|
|
92.2 |
|
|
|
21.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
237.9 |
|
|
$ |
216.1 |
|
|
$ |
21.8 |
|
|
$ |
686.9 |
|
|
$ |
632.4 |
|
|
$ |
54.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in revenue in Asia is primarily due to the economic growth in the Asia
region, resulting in increased business levels and cash collections.
Revenue by Geography as a Percent of Total Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
United States |
|
|
41% |
|
|
|
41% |
|
|
|
40% |
|
|
|
42% |
|
Other Americas |
|
|
2% |
|
|
|
2% |
|
|
|
2% |
|
|
|
2% |
|
Europe, Middle East and Africa |
|
|
20% |
|
|
|
20% |
|
|
|
22% |
|
|
|
22% |
|
Japan |
|
|
20% |
|
|
|
23% |
|
|
|
19% |
|
|
|
20% |
|
Asia |
|
|
17% |
|
|
|
14% |
|
|
|
17% |
|
|
|
14% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
100% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most of our revenue is transacted in the United States dollar. However, certain revenue
transactions are in foreign currencies, primarily the Japanese yen, and we recognize additional
revenue in periods when the United States dollar weakens in value against the Japanese yen and
reduced revenue in periods when the United States dollar strengthens against the Japanese yen. For
an additional description of how changes in foreign exchange rates affect our Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements, see the discussion under the heading Item 3. Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk Disclosures About Market Risk Foreign Currency Risk.
Stock-based Compensation Expense Summary
Stock-based compensation expense is reflected throughout our costs and expenses as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Cost of product |
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
|
$ |
0.1 |
|
Cost of services |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
Cost of maintenance |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
Marketing and sales |
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
|
9.7 |
|
Research and
development |
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
|
6.8 |
|
|
|
13.7 |
|
|
|
21.2 |
|
General and
administrative |
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
8.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
12.0 |
|
|
$ |
14.5 |
|
|
$ |
32.8 |
|
|
$ |
43.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock-based compensation expense decreased by $2.5 million during the three months ended
October 2, 2010, as compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009, and $10.9 million during
the nine months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, due to
the following:
37
|
|
|
The decrease in the maximum purchase limits under our Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, or ESPP, and a lower grant date fair value of purchase rights granted; |
|
|
|
|
A decrease in the number of equity awards, including restricted stock awards
and restricted stock units, collectively referred to as restricted stock, and stock
options; |
|
|
|
|
A decrease in stock bonuses; and |
|
|
|
|
A decrease in expense for restricted stock and stock options primarily due
to lower grant date fair values because of a lower grant date stock price. |
Cost of Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Product |
|
$ |
10.8 |
|
|
$ |
6.4 |
|
|
$ |
4.4 |
|
|
$ |
23.2 |
|
|
$ |
23.8 |
|
|
$ |
(0.6 |
) |
Services |
|
$ |
19.1 |
|
|
$ |
21.1 |
|
|
$ |
(2.0 |
) |
|
$ |
62.6 |
|
|
$ |
69.6 |
|
|
$ |
(7.0 |
) |
Maintenance |
|
$ |
10.0 |
|
|
$ |
11.1 |
|
|
$ |
(1.1 |
) |
|
$ |
31.8 |
|
|
$ |
35.4 |
|
|
$ |
(3.6 |
) |
The following table shows cost of revenue as a percentage of related revenue for the
three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Product |
|
|
9% |
|
|
|
7% |
|
|
|
7% |
|
|
|
8% |
|
Services |
|
|
80% |
|
|
|
79% |
|
|
|
83% |
|
|
|
83% |
|
Maintenance |
|
|
10% |
|
|
|
12% |
|
|
|
12% |
|
|
|
13% |
|
Cost of Product
Cost of product includes costs associated with the sale or lease of our hardware and licensing
of our software products. Cost of product primarily includes the cost of employee salary, benefits
and other employee-related costs, including stock-based compensation expense, amortization of
acquired intangibles directly related to our products, the cost of technical documentation and
royalties payable to third-party vendors. Cost of product associated with our hardware products
also includes materials, assembly and overhead. These additional manufacturing costs make our cost
of hardware product higher, as a percentage of revenue, than our cost of software product.
A summary of Cost of product is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Product related costs |
|
$ |
8.6 |
|
|
$ |
5.8 |
|
|
$ |
19.8 |
|
|
$ |
20.1 |
|
Amortization of acquired intangibles |
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Cost of product |
|
$ |
10.8 |
|
|
$ |
6.4 |
|
|
$ |
23.2 |
|
|
$ |
23.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product related costs increased during the three months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to
the three months ended October 3, 2009, primarily due to an increase in hardware revenue.
Amortization of acquired intangibles increased during the three months ended October 2, 2010, as
compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009, due to amortization of intangible assets associated with the
Denali acquisition. There were no material changes in product related costs or amortization of
acquired intangibles during the nine months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months
ended October 3, 2009.
38
Cost of product depends primarily upon the extent to which we acquire intangible assets,
acquire licenses and incorporate third party technology in our products that are licensed or sold
in any given period, and the actual mix of hardware and software product sales in any given period.
Cost of Services
Cost of services primarily includes employee salary, benefits and other employee-related
costs, costs to maintain the infrastructure necessary to manage a services organization, and
provisions for contract losses, if any. Cost of services decreased by $2.0 million during the three
months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009, and $7.0
million during the nine months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months ended October
3, 2009, due to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Nine Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Salary, benefits and other employee-related costs |
|
$ |
(1.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(3.2 |
) |
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
Professional services |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
Other individually insignificant items |
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
|
|
(1.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(2.0 |
) |
|
$ |
(7.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of Maintenance
Cost of maintenance includes the cost of customer services, such as telephonic and on-site
support, employee salary, benefits and other employee-related costs, and documentation of
maintenance updates, as well as amortization of intangible assets directly related to our
maintenance contracts. Cost of maintenance decreased by $1.1 million during the three months ended
October 2, 2010, as compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009, and $3.6 million during the
nine months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, primarily
due to certain acquired intangible assets becoming fully amortized.
Operating Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Marketing and sales |
|
$ |
76.1 |
|
|
$ |
68.3 |
|
|
$ |
7.8 |
|
|
$ |
222.3 |
|
|
$ |
214.6 |
|
|
$ |
7.7 |
|
Research and development |
|
|
97.3 |
|
|
|
88.0 |
|
|
|
9.3 |
|
|
|
278.6 |
|
|
|
273.4 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
25.1 |
|
|
|
28.7 |
|
|
|
(3.6 |
) |
|
|
65.0 |
|
|
|
101.3 |
|
|
|
(36.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
$ |
198.5 |
|
|
$ |
185.0 |
|
|
$ |
13.5 |
|
|
$ |
565.9 |
|
|
$ |
589.3 |
|
|
$ |
(23.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in our operating expenses during the three months ended October 2, 2010, as
compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009, is primarily due to higher employee-related
costs, including the additional costs related to our acquisition of Denali. These costs include
ongoing Denali operating expenses and expenses related to deferred Denali acquisition payments. We
recorded operating expenses of $5.3 million related to these deferred Denali acquisition payments
during the three months ended October 2, 2010. See Note 3 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details
regarding the deferred Denali acquisition payments.
39
The decrease in our operating expenses during the nine months ended October 2, 2010, as
compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, is primarily due to the decrease in bad debt
expense. Bad debt expense decreased by $35.2 million during the nine months ended October 2, 2010,
as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, due to the prior year period increase in our
allowance for doubtful accounts of $22.1 million as a result of our assessment of the increased
risk of customer delays or defaults on payment obligations and the current year release of $13.1
million of the reserve as a result of collections on certain receivables that were previously
included in our allowance for doubtful accounts.
The following table shows operating expenses as a percentage of total revenue for the three
and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Marketing and sales |
|
|
32% |
|
|
|
32% |
|
|
|
32% |
|
|
|
34% |
|
Research and development |
|
|
41% |
|
|
|
41% |
|
|
|
41% |
|
|
|
43% |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
11% |
|
|
|
13% |
|
|
|
9% |
|
|
|
16% |
|
Marketing and Sales
Marketing and sales expense increased by $7.8 million during the three months ended October 2,
2010, as compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009, and by $7.7 million during the nine
months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, due to the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Nine Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
Salary, commissions, benefits and other employee-related costs |
|
$ |
7.4 |
|
|
$ |
10.9 |
|
Other discretionary spending |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
Facilities and other infrastructure costs |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
(1.4 |
) |
Depreciation |
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
|
|
(4.2 |
) |
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
|
|
(2.4 |
) |
Other individually insignificant items |
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
7.8 |
|
|
$ |
7.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marketing
and sales expense is expected to increase during the remainder of fiscal 2010, as
compared to the same period in fiscal 2009, due to higher
employee-related costs, including commissions, primarily resulting
from improving business levels, as compared to business levels in the same period in fiscal 2009.
40
Research and Development
Research and development expense increased by $9.3 million during the three months ended
October 2, 2010, as compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009, and by $5.2 million during
the nine months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, due to
the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Nine Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salary, benefits and other employee-related costs |
|
$ |
15.6 |
|
|
$ |
20.5 |
|
Computer equipment lease costs and maintenance
costs associated with third-party software |
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
|
|
(3.6 |
) |
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
|
(7.5 |
) |
Other Discretionary |
|
|
(4.2 |
) |
|
|
(4.5 |
) |
Other individually insignificant items |
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
9.3 |
|
|
$ |
5.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Salary, benefits and other employee-related costs included in Research and development expense
include operating expenses associated with deferred Denali acquisition payments. We recorded
Research and development expense of $5.1 million related to these deferred Denali acquisition
payments during the three months ended October 2, 2010 and $5.8 million during the nine months
ended October 2, 2010. We expect to record approximately $4.0 million of expense related to the
deferred Denali acquisition payments during the fourth quarter of 2010. See Note 3 to our Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details regarding the deferred Denali acquisition
payments.
General and Administrative
General and administrative expense decreased by $3.6 million during the three months ended
October 2, 2010, as compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009, and by $36.3 million during
the nine months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, due to
the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
Three Months |
|
|
Nine Months |
|
|
|
Ended |
|
|
Ended |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bad debt expense |
|
$ |
(1.8 |
) |
|
$ |
(35.2 |
) |
Impairment of property, plant, and equipment |
|
|
(2.1 |
) |
|
|
(5.6 |
) |
Salary, benefits and other employee-related costs |
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
|
5.0 |
|
Facilities and other infrastructure costs |
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
|
|
(2.6 |
) |
Other individually insignificant items |
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(3.6 |
) |
|
$ |
(36.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bad debt expense decreased by $35.2 million during the nine months ended October 2, 2010, as
compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, due to the prior year period increase in our
allowance for doubtful accounts of $22.1 million as a result of our assessment of the increased
risk of customer delays or defaults on payment obligations and the current year release of $13.1
million of the reserve as a result of collections on certain receivables that were previously
included in our allowance for doubtful accounts. See Note 7 to our Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements for additional details regarding our allowance for doubtful accounts.
41
Amortization of Acquired Intangibles
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of
acquired
intangibles |
|
$ |
4.5 |
|
|
$ |
2.7 |
|
|
$ |
1.8 |
|
|
$ |
9.7 |
|
|
$ |
8.7 |
|
|
$ |
1.0 |
|
Amortization of acquired intangibles increased by $1.8 million during the three months
ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the three months ended October 3, 2009, and $1.0 million
during the nine months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009,
primarily due to amortization of intangibles acquired during the nine months ended October 2, 2010.
Restructuring and Other Charges (Credits)
We have initiated multiple restructuring plans since 2001, including the 2009 Restructuring
Plan, which includes restructuring activities initiated during the second quarter of fiscal 2009,
as well as restructuring activities initiated during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2009. The $1.7
million credit to Restructuring and other charges (credits) during the three months ended October
2, 2010 was primarily due to certain severance and related benefits costs that were less than
previously estimated.
The $3.1 million credit to Restructuring and other charges (credits) during the nine months
ended October 2, 2010 was primarily due to a $3.6 million credit for severance and related benefits
costs that were less than previously estimated, partially offset by charges of $0.4 million related
to facilities that we vacated during the nine months ended October 2, 2010 and by charges of $0.1
million for assets related to these vacated facilities. See Note 6 to our Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements for additional details of these restructuring plans.
Because the restructuring charges and related benefits are derived from managements estimates
made during the formulation of the restructuring plans, based on then-currently available
information, our restructuring plans may not achieve the benefits anticipated on the timetable or
at the level contemplated. Demand for our products and services and, ultimately, our future
financial performance, is difficult to predict with any degree of certainty and is especially
difficult to predict in light of the current economic challenges and uncertainty.
42
Interest Expense
The components of Interest expense for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and
October 3, 2009 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contractual cash interest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible Senior Notes |
|
$ |
1.1 |
|
|
$ |
1.8 |
|
|
$ |
4.5 |
|
|
$ |
5.4 |
|
2015 Notes |
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Amortization of debt discount: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible Senior Notes |
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
14.5 |
|
2015 Notes |
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Amortization of deferred financing costs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertible Senior Notes |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
2015 Notes |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Other interest expense |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest expense |
|
$ |
10.5 |
|
|
$ |
7.3 |
|
|
$ |
25.9 |
|
|
$ |
21.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in interest expense for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010, when
compared to the same periods in 2009 is due to interest expense related to the 2015 Notes. See Note
2 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details of the 2015 Notes.
Other Income (Expense), net
Other income (expense), net, for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October
3, 2009 was as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
$ |
0.3 |
|
|
$ |
0.3 |
|
|
$ |
0.9 |
|
|
$ |
2.1 |
|
Gains on sale of non-marketable securities |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
Gains (losses) on trading securities in
the non-qualified deferred compensation
trust |
|
|
(1.9 |
) |
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
(4.3 |
) |
Gains (losses) on foreign exchange |
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
Equity losses from investments |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
Write-down of investments |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(0.6 |
) |
|
|
(1.5 |
) |
|
|
(5.2 |
) |
Loss on early extinguishment of debt |
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
(5.3 |
) |
|
|
---- |
|
Other income (expense) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
|
|
0.6 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income (expense), net |
|
$ |
(2.9 |
) |
|
$ |
2.9 |
|
|
$ |
---- |
|
|
$ |
(5.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the nine months ended October 2, 2010, we recorded gains totaling $4.9 million for five
cost method investments that were liquidated.
We determined that certain of our non-marketable securities were other-than-temporarily
impaired and we wrote down such investments by $1.5 million during the nine months ended October 2,
2010, $0.6 million during the three months ended October 3, 2009 and $5.2 million during the nine
months ended October 3, 2009.
43
We repurchased a portion of our Convertible Senior Notes and recorded a loss for the early
extinguishment of debt during the nine months ended October 2, 2010. See Note 2 to our Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details of this loss.
Income Taxes
The following table presents the Provision (benefit) for income taxes and the effective tax
rate for the three and nine months ended October 2, 2010 and October 3, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In millions, except percentages) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (benefit) for income taxes |
|
$ |
(143.2 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.4 |
) |
|
$ |
(192.7 |
) |
|
$ |
12.0 |
|
Effective tax rate |
|
|
869.8% |
|
|
|
3.1% |
|
|
|
662.2% |
|
|
|
(8.6)% |
|
Our benefit for income taxes for the three months ended October 2, 2010 is primarily because
of the decrease in net unrecognized tax benefits and accrued interest of $148.3 million as a result
of the effective settlement of certain tax matters with the IRS in August 2010. Our benefit for
income taxes for the nine months ended October 2, 2010 is primarily due to the effective settlement
with the IRS and the release of approximately $66.7 million of valuation allowance against our
deferred tax assets primarily due to the recognition of deferred tax liabilities related to the acquisition
of intangibles with Denali. Our negative effective tax rate for the nine months ended October 3,
2009 was primarily due to the recognition of period-specific tax expense which was partially offset
by the tax benefit of the fiscal 2009 United States federal net operating loss that can be utilized
in prior years combined with a Loss before provision (benefit) for income taxes for the nine months
ended October 3, 2009.
We expect to recognize a benefit for income taxes for fiscal 2010, primarily due to the
effective settlement with the IRS and the release of valuation allowance against our deferred tax
asset because of the recognition of deferred tax liabilities related to the acquisition of
intangibles with Denali. We also expect to have a Loss before provision (benefit) for income
taxes for fiscal 2010.
The IRS and other tax authorities regularly examine our income tax returns and we have
received Revenue Agents Reports, or RARs, indicating that the IRS has proposed to assess certain
tax deficiencies. For further discussion regarding our income taxes, including the status of the
IRS examinations and unrecognized tax benefits, see Note 8 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
44
Liquidity and Capital Resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
January 2, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and Short-term investments |
|
$ |
511.7 |
|
|
$ |
571.3 |
|
|
$ |
(59.6 |
) |
Net working capital |
|
$ |
361.3 |
|
|
$ |
452.8 |
|
|
$ |
(91.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine Months Ended |
|
|
|
|
|
|
October 2, |
|
|
October 3, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by operating activities |
|
$ |
142.1 |
|
|
$ |
24.7 |
|
|
$ |
117.4 |
|
Cash used for investing activities |
|
$ |
(279.6 |
) |
|
$ |
(47.6 |
) |
|
$ |
(232.0 |
) |
Cash provided by financing activities |
|
$ |
67.8 |
|
|
$ |
21.3 |
|
|
$ |
46.5 |
|
Cash and Cash Equivalents and Short-term Investments
As of October 2, 2010, our principal sources of liquidity consisted of $511.7 million of Cash
and cash equivalents and Short-term investments, as compared to $571.3 million as of January 2,
2010.
Our primary sources of cash in the nine months ended October 2, 2010 were:
|
|
|
Customer payments under software and IP licenses and from the sale or lease
of our hardware products; |
|
|
|
|
Customer payments for maintenance provided on our software and hardware
products; |
|
|
|
|
Customer payments for engineering services; |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from the issuance of our 2015 Notes; |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from the sale of our 2015 Warrants; |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from the sale of long-term investments; and |
|
|
|
|
Cash received for common stock purchases under our employee stock purchase
plan. |
Our primary uses of cash in the nine months ended October 2, 2010 were:
|
|
|
Payments relating to salaries, benefits, other employee-related costs and
other operating expenses, including our restructuring plans; |
|
|
|
|
Payments to former shareholders of acquired businesses, net of cash
acquired, including Denali; |
|
|
|
|
Repurchases of a portion of our Convertible Senior Notes; |
|
|
|
|
Payments made to purchase the 2015 Notes Hedges; |
|
|
|
|
Purchases of treasury stock; and |
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment. |
We expect that current cash and short-term investment balances and cash flows that are
generated from operations will be sufficient to meet our working capital, other capital and
liquidity requirements for at least the next 12 months.
45
Net Working Capital
Net working capital decreased by $91.5 million as of October 2, 2010, as compared to January
2, 2010, due to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in Current portion of deferred revenue |
|
$ |
(60.9 |
) |
Decrease in Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(60.1 |
) |
Increase in Prepaid expenses and other |
|
|
25.3 |
|
Other individually insignificant items |
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(91.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
Net cash from operating activities increased by $117.4 million during the nine months ended
October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, due to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss), net of non-cash related items |
|
$ |
195.8 |
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effect of acquired businesses |
|
|
(72.6 |
) |
Proceeds from the sale of receivables, net |
|
|
(5.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
117.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating activities include Net income (loss), adjusted for certain non-cash
charges, as well as changes in the balances of certain assets and liabilities. Our cash flows from
operating activities are significantly influenced by business levels and the payment terms set
forth in our license agreements. As a result of the challenging economic environment, our
customers, who are primarily concentrated in the semiconductor sector, have experienced and may
continue to experience adverse changes in their business and as a result, may delay purchasing our
products and services or delay or default on their payment obligations.
As of October 2, 2010, approximately one-third of our total Receivables, net and Installment
contract receivables, net were attributable to the ten customers with the largest balances of
Receivables, net and Installment contract receivables, net. As of January 2, 2010, approximately
half of our total Receivables, net and Installment contract receivables, net were attributable to
the ten customers with the largest balances of Receivables, net and Installment contract
receivables, net.
If our customers are not successful in generating sufficient cash or are precluded from
securing financing, they may not be able to pay, or may delay payment of, accounts receivable that
are owed to us, although these obligations are generally not cancelable. Our customers inability
to fulfill payment obligations may adversely affect our cash flow. Additionally, our customers may
seek to renegotiate pre-existing contractual commitments. Though we have not yet experienced a
material level of defaults, any material payment default by our customers or significant reductions
in existing contractual commitments would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition
and operating results.
As of October 2, 2010, we had made payments in connection with the 2009 Restructuring Plan in
the amount of $30.5 million and we expect to pay an additional amount of $0.6 million, of which
$0.4 million is for termination benefits. We expect substantially all termination benefits related
to the 2009 Restructuring Plan to be paid by April 3, 2011.
46
We expect to pay $9.5 million in deferred Denali acquisition payments during the fourth fiscal
quarter of 2010. See Note 3 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for additional
details regarding the deferred Denali acquisition payments.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
Our primary investing activities consisted of:
|
|
|
Cash paid in business combinations and asset acquisitions, net of cash
acquired; |
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment; and |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from the sale of long-term investments. |
Net cash from investing activities decreased by $232.0 million during the nine months ended
October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, due to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid in business combinations and asset acquisitions, net of cash acquired |
|
$ |
(242.0 |
) |
Proceeds from the sale of long-term investments |
|
|
10.3 |
|
Other individually insignificant items |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(232.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
In connection with our acquisitions completed before October 2, 2010, we may be obligated to
pay up to an aggregate of $16.4 million in cash during the next 30 months if certain defined
performance goals are achieved in full, of which $9.5 million would be expensed in our Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
In June 2010, we issued $350.0 million principal amount of the 2015 Notes. Concurrently with
the issuance of the 2015 Notes, we entered into the 2015 Notes Hedges with various parties to
reduce the potential cash outlay from the conversion of the 2015 Notes and intended to mitigate the
negative effect such conversion may have on the price of our common stock. In separate
transactions, we sold warrants, or the 2015 Warrants, to purchase our common stock at a price of
$10.78 per share to various parties. We used an aggregate of $187.2 million of the net proceeds
from the issuance of the 2015 Notes to purchase in the open market $100.0 million principal amount
of our 2011 Notes and $100.0 million principal amount of our 2013 Notes, and we repurchased 6.5
million shares of our common stock at a cost of $40.0 million.
47
Net cash from financing activities increased by $46.5 million during the nine months ended
October 2, 2010, as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009, due to the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of 2015 Notes, net of initial purchasers fees |
|
$ |
340.2 |
|
Proceeds from sale of 2015 Warrants |
|
|
37.5 |
|
Tax effect related to employee stock transactions allocated to equity |
|
|
(9.7 |
) |
Proceeds from the issuance of common stock |
|
|
(14.6 |
) |
Purchases of treasury stock |
|
|
(40.0 |
) |
Purchase of 2015 Notes Hedges |
|
|
(76.6 |
) |
Repurchase of Convertible Senior Notes |
|
|
(187.2 |
) |
Other individually insignificant items |
|
|
(3.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
46.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
During the nine months ended October 2, 2010, we paid $9.7 million of taxes related to
employee stock transactions. See Note 8 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for
further discussion of this payment.
The decrease in Proceeds from the issuance of common stock during the nine months ended
October 2, 2010 as compared to the nine months ended October 3, 2009 is primarily due to decreased
purchase limits under our ESPP, which became effective during fiscal 2009.
When treasury stock is re-issued at a price higher than its cost, the difference is recorded
as a component of Capital in excess of par in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. When
treasury stock is re-issued at a price lower than its cost, the difference is recorded as a
component of Capital in excess of par to the extent that there are treasury stock gains to offset
the losses. If there are no treasury stock gains in Capital in excess of par, the losses upon
re-issuance of treasury stock are recorded as a component of Accumulated deficit in the Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets. We recorded losses on the re-issuance of treasury stock of $85.7
million during the nine months ended October 2, 2010, as compared to $209.2 million during the nine
months ended October 3, 2009.
As of October 2, 2010, we have $814.4 million remaining under the stock repurchase programs
authorized by our Board of Directors. See Note 11 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Other Factors Affecting Liquidity and Capital Resources
Income Taxes
We provide for United States income taxes on earnings of our foreign subsidiaries unless the
earnings are considered indefinitely invested outside the United States. As of January 2, 2010, we
had recognized a deferred tax liability of $34.7 million related to $67.9 million of earnings from
certain of our foreign subsidiaries that are not considered indefinitely reinvested outside the
United States and for which we have previously made a provision for income tax. We repatriated
$62.9 million of the $67.9 million during the nine months ended October 2, 2010, which resulted in
cash tax payments of approximately $1.9 million.
We intend to indefinitely reinvest approximately $79.0 million of undistributed earnings of
our foreign subsidiaries as of January 2, 2010, to meet the working capital and long-term capital
needs of our foreign subsidiaries. The unrecognized deferred tax liability for these indefinitely
reinvested foreign earnings was approximately $35.3 million as of January 2, 2010.
48
We determined that uncertain tax positions that were subject to the IRS examination of our
federal income tax returns for the tax years 2000 through 2002 were effectively settled during the
three and nine months ended October 2, 2010. In prior periods, we made cash deposits of
approximately $8.9 million to the IRS to cover tax liabilities related to this settlement. We
expect to make additional tax payments, net of tax refunds to be received, of approximately $1.0
million to the IRS and to various state and local tax authorities in connection with this
settlement.
During the nine months ended October 2, 2010, we released $66.7 million of valuation allowance
against our deferred tax assets primarily due to the acquisition accounting for
intangibles acquired with Denali. This release of the valuation allowance does not impact our current or future cash
position.
The IRS and other tax authorities regularly examine our income tax returns and we have
received RARs indicating that the IRS has proposed to assess certain tax deficiencies. For further
discussion regarding our Income taxes and the status of the IRS examinations, see Note 8 to our
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
2.625% Cash Convertible Senior Notes Due 2015
In June 2010, we issued $350.0 million principal amount of the 2015 Notes. Concurrently with
the issuance of the 2015 Notes, we entered into the 2015 Notes Hedges with various parties to
reduce the potential cash outlay from the cash conversion of the 2015 Notes and intended to
mitigate the negative effect such cash conversion may have on the price of our common stock. In
separate transactions, we sold the 2015 Warrants to various parties. The 2015 Notes mature on June
1, 2015, and will be paid in cash at maturity. As of October 2, 2010, none of the conditions
allowing the holders of the 2015 Notes to convert the 2015 Notes into cash had been met. For
additional description of the 2015 Notes, including the hedge and warrants transactions, see Note 2
to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
1.375% Convertible Senior Notes Due December 15, 2011 and 1.500% Convertible Senior Notes Due
December 15, 2013
In December 2006, we issued $250.0 million principal amount of the 2011 Notes and $250.0
million principal amount of the 2013 Notes. Concurrently with the issuance of the Convertible
Senior Notes, we entered into hedge transactions, or the Convertible Senior Notes Hedges, with
various parties to reduce the potential dilution from the conversion of the Convertible Senior
Notes and intended to mitigate the negative effect such conversion may have on the price of our
common stock. In separate transactions, we sold warrants, or the Convertible Senior Notes
Warrants, to various parties. The 2011 Notes mature on December 15, 2011 and the 2013 Notes mature
on December 15, 2013, and the principal amounts will be paid in cash at maturity. As of October 2,
2010, none of the conditions allowing the holders of the Convertible Senior Notes to convert had
been met.
In connection with the issuance of the 2015 Notes, we used an aggregate of $187.2 million of
the net proceeds to purchase in the open market $100.0 million principal amount of our 2011 Notes
and $100.0 million principal amount of our 2013 Notes, resulting in a remaining principal balance
of $150.0 million for the 2011 Notes and $150.0 million for the 2013 Notes. We also sold a portion
of the Convertible Senior Notes Hedges and purchased a portion of the Convertible Senior Notes
Warrants. For additional description of the Convertible Senior Notes, including the hedge and
warrants transactions, see Note 2 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
49
Contractual Obligations
As described below, items reported in the
Contractual Obligations table in Part II Item 7 of
our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 2, 2010 have changed materially due to
the effective settlement of the IRS examination of our federal income tax returns for the tax years
2000 through 2002. See Note 8 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for additional
details of this settlement.
Including the impact of the effective settlement, the current
income tax liabilities related
to unrecognized tax benefits as of October 2, 2010 were $4.4 million, which we expect to pay within one year.
As
of October 2, 2010, the long-term income tax liabilities related to unrecognized tax benefits, including the
impact of the effective settlement, disclosed in footnote (2) to the Contractual Obligations table,
were $133.4 million, of which we estimate $97.5 million will be settled in the next one to three
years and $35.9 million of which we do not consider a contractual obligation because we expect this liability
to be offset by available net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards and that future cash
payments will not be required to settle this liability. However, the total amounts of income tax
payable and the timing of such tax payments may depend upon the resolution of current and future
tax examinations that cannot be estimated with certainty.
As
of October 2, 2010, the contractual obligations table has also changed materially due to the issuance of the 2015
Notes and the purchase of $100.0 million principal amount of our 2011 Notes and $100.0 million
principal amount of our 2013 Notes. Refer to Liquidity and Capital Resources and Note 2 to our
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details of our convertible notes and the
associated contractual obligations.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Foreign Currency Risk
Most of our revenue, expenses and material business activity are transacted in the United
States dollar. However, certain of our operations include transactions in foreign currencies and,
therefore, we benefit from a weaker dollar, and in certain countries, in particular, Japan, where
we invoice customers in the local currency, we are adversely affected by a stronger dollar. The
primary effect of foreign currency transactions on our results of operations from a weakening
United States dollar is an increase in revenue offset by a smaller increase in expenses.
Conversely, the primary effect of foreign currency transactions on our results of operations from a
strengthening United States dollar is a reduction in revenue offset by a smaller reduction in
expenses.
We enter into foreign currency forward exchange contracts with financial institutions to
protect against currency exchange risks associated with existing assets and liabilities. A foreign
currency forward exchange contract acts as a hedge by increasing in value when underlying assets
decrease in value or underlying liabilities increase in value due to changes in foreign exchange
rates. Conversely, a foreign currency forward exchange contract decreases in value when underlying
assets increase in value or underlying liabilities decrease in value due to changes in foreign
exchange rates. These forward contracts are not designated as accounting hedges and, therefore, the
unrealized gains and losses are recognized in Other income (expense), net, in advance of the actual
foreign currency cash flows with the fair value of these forward contracts being recorded as
accrued liabilities or other current assets.
Our policy governing hedges of foreign currency risk does not allow us to use forward
contracts for trading purposes. Our forward contracts generally have maturities of 90 days or less.
The effectiveness of our hedging program depends on our ability to estimate future asset and
liability exposures. We enter into
50
currency forward exchange contracts based on estimated future asset and liability exposures.
Recognized gains and losses with respect to our current hedging activities will ultimately depend
on how accurately we are able to match the amount of currency forward exchange contracts with
actual underlying asset and liability exposures.
The following table provides information, as of October 2, 2010, about our forward foreign
currency contracts. The information is provided in United States dollar equivalent amounts. The
table presents the notional amounts, at contract exchange rates, and the weighted average
contractual foreign currency exchange rates expressed as units of the foreign currency per United
States dollar, which in some cases may not be the market convention for quoting a particular
currency. All of these forward contracts mature during October and November of 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Notional |
|
|
Contract |
|
|
|
Principal |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forward Contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Japanese yen |
|
$ |
20.7 |
|
|
|
83.08 |
|
Indian rupee |
|
|
12.0 |
|
|
|
46.36 |
|
Chinese renminbi |
|
|
11.4 |
|
|
|
6.76 |
|
European union euro |
|
|
9.7 |
|
|
|
.77 |
|
New Taiwan dollar |
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
|
31.65 |
|
Canadian dollar |
|
|
8.1 |
|
|
|
1.02 |
|
Hong Kong dollar |
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
|
7.77 |
|
Israeli shekel |
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
3.76 |
|
Other currencies |
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
90.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated fair value |
|
$ |
1.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
While we actively monitor our foreign currency risks, there can be no assurance that our
foreign currency hedging activities will substantially offset the impact of fluctuations in
currency exchange rates on our results of operations, cash flows and financial position.
Interest Rate Risk
Our exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates relates primarily to our portfolio
of Cash and cash equivalents. While we are exposed to interest rate fluctuations in many of the
worlds leading industrialized countries, our interest income and expense is most sensitive to
fluctuations in the general level of United States interest rates. In this regard, changes in
United States interest rates affect the interest earned on our Cash and cash equivalents and the
costs associated with foreign currency hedges.
We invest in high quality credit issuers and, by policy, limit the amount of our credit
exposure to any one issuer. As part of our policy, our first priority is to reduce the risk of
principal loss. Consequently, we seek to preserve our invested funds by limiting default risk,
market risk and reinvestment risk. We mitigate default risk by investing in only high quality
credit securities that we believe to have low credit risk, and by positioning our portfolio to
respond appropriately to a significant reduction in a credit rating of any investment issuer or
guarantor. The short-term interest-bearing portfolio of Cash and cash equivalents includes only
marketable securities with active secondary or resale markets to ensure portfolio liquidity.
51
All highly liquid investments with a maturity of three months or less at the date of purchase
are considered to be cash equivalents. Investments with maturities greater than three months are
classified as available-for-sale and are considered to be short-term investments. The carrying
value of our interest-bearing instruments approximated fair value as of October 2, 2010. The
following table presents the carrying value and related weighted average interest rates for our
interest-bearing instruments, which are all classified as Cash and cash equivalents on our
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet as of October 2, 2010.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Interest Rate |
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-Bearing Instruments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents variable rate |
|
$ |
414.2 |
|
|
|
0.24% |
|
Cash variable rate |
|
|
40.1 |
|
|
|
0.16% |
|
Cash fixed rate |
|
|
16.3 |
|
|
|
0.84% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing instruments |
|
$ |
470.6 |
|
|
|
0.25% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity Price Risk
2.625% Cash Convertible Senior Notes Due 2015
In June 2010, we issued $350.0 million principal amount of our 2015 Notes to four initial
purchasers in a private placement pursuant to Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, or the Securities Act, for resale to
qualified institutional buyers pursuant to Rule 144A of the Securities Act. Concurrently with the
issuance of the 2015 Notes, we entered into the 2015 Notes Hedges with various parties to reduce
the potential cash outlay from the cash conversion of the 2015 Notes and intended to mitigate the
negative effect such cash conversion may have on the price of our common stock. In separate
transactions, we sold the 2015 Warrants to various parties. The 2015 Notes mature on June 1, 2015,
and will be paid in cash at maturity. As of October 2, 2010, none of the conditions allowing the
holders of the 2015 Notes to convert had been met. For additional description of the 2015 Notes,
including the hedge and warrants transactions, see Note 2 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
1.375% Convertible Senior Notes Due December 15, 2011 and 1.500% Convertible Senior Notes Due
December 15, 2013
In December 2006, we issued $250.0 million principal amount of our 2011 Notes and $250.0
million of our 2013 Notes to three initial purchasers in a private placement pursuant to Section
4(2) of the Securities Act for resale to qualified institutional buyers pursuant to Rule 144A of
the Securities Act. Concurrently with the issuance of the Convertible Senior Notes, we entered into
the Convertible Senior Notes Hedges with various parties to reduce the potential dilution from the
conversion of the Convertible Senior Notes and intended to mitigate the negative effect such
conversion may have on the price of our common stock. In separate transactions, we sold the
Convertible Senior Notes Warrants to various parties. The 2011 Notes mature on December 15, 2011
and the 2013 Notes mature on December 15, 2013, and the principal amounts will be paid in cash at
maturity. As of October 2, 2010, none of the conditions allowing the holders of the Convertible
Senior Notes to convert had been met.
In connection with the issuance of the 2015 Notes, we used an aggregate of $187.2 million of
the net proceeds to purchase in the open market $100.0 million principal amount of our 2011 Notes
and $100.0 million principal amount of our 2013 Notes, resulting in a remaining principal balance
of $150.0 million for the 2011 Notes and $150.0 million for the 2013 Notes. We also sold a portion
of the Convertible Senior Notes Hedges and purchased a portion of the Convertible Senior Notes
Warrants. For additional description
52
of the Convertible Senior Notes, including the hedge and warrants transactions, see Note 2 to
our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Investments
We have a portfolio of equity investments that includes marketable equity securities and
non-marketable equity securities. Our equity investments are made primarily in connection with our
strategic investment program. Under our strategic investment program, from time to time we make
cash investments in companies with technologies that are potentially strategically important to us.
See Note 6 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
additional details of these investments. Our investment in non-marketable equity securities had a
carrying value of $9.3 million as of October 2, 2010 and $15.3 million as of January 2, 2010.
Item 4.
Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We carried out an evaluation required by Rule 13a-15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended, or the Exchange Act, under the supervision and with the participation of our
management, including the Chief Executive Officer, or CEO, and the Chief Financial Officer, or CFO,
of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Rules 13-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) as of October 2, 2010.
The evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures included a review of our processes
and the effect on the information generated for use in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. In the
course of this evaluation, we sought to identify any material weaknesses in our disclosure controls
and procedures, to determine whether we had identified any acts of fraud involving personnel who
have a significant role in our disclosure controls and procedures, and to confirm that any
necessary corrective action, including process improvements, was taken. This type of evaluation is
done every fiscal quarter so that our conclusions concerning the effectiveness of these controls
can be reported in our periodic reports filed with the SEC. The overall goals of these evaluation
activities are to monitor our disclosure controls and procedures and to make modifications as
necessary. We intend to maintain these disclosure controls and procedures, modifying them as
circumstances warrant.
Based on their evaluation as of October 2, 2010, our CEO and CFO have concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that the
information required to be disclosed by us in our reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act
is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SECs
rules and forms and is accumulated and communicated to our management, including the CEO and CFO,
as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter
ended October 2, 2010 that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our
internal control over financial reporting.
53
Inherent Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls
Our management, including our CEO and CFO, does not expect that our disclosure controls and
procedures or our internal control over financial reporting will prevent or detect all error and
all fraud. Internal control over financial reporting, no matter how well conceived and operated,
can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of internal control are
met. Further, the design of internal control must reflect the fact that there are resource
constraints, and the benefits of the control must be considered relative to their costs. While our
disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting are designed to
provide reasonable assurance of their effectiveness, because of the inherent limitations in all
control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues
and instances of fraud, if any, within Cadence have been detected.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
From time to time, we are involved in various disputes and litigation that arise in the
ordinary course of business. These include disputes and lawsuits related to intellectual property,
mergers and acquisitions, licensing, contracts, distribution arrangements and employee relations
matters. At least quarterly, we review the status of each significant matter and assess its
potential financial exposure. If the potential loss from any claim or legal proceeding is
considered probable and the amount or the range of loss can be estimated, we accrue a liability for
the estimated loss. Legal proceedings are subject to uncertainties, and the outcomes are difficult
to predict. Because of such uncertainties, accruals are based on our judgments using the best
information available at the time. As additional information becomes available, we reassess the
potential liability related to pending claims and litigation matters and may revise our estimates.
During fiscal 2008, three complaints were filed in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California, or District Court, all alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, on
behalf of a purported class of purchasers of our common stock. On July 7, 2010, the parties agreed,
and the District Court ordered, that the litigation be stayed in order to facilitate mediation.
This litigation remains stayed while the parties continue participating in the mediation process.
If this mediation process is unsuccessful and the litigation is not resolved through a negotiated
settlement, we plan to continue to vigorously defend these consolidated cases and any other
securities lawsuits that may be filed. See Note 13 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements for additional details and the status of these complaints.
Also during fiscal 2008, two derivative complaints were filed in Santa Clara County Superior
Court, or Superior Court. These complaints purport to bring suit derivatively, on behalf of
Cadence, against certain of our current and former directors for alleged breach of fiduciary duty,
abuse of control, gross mismanagement, waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment. The parties
to these cases agreed to a temporary stay of the proceedings. The plaintiffs filed a consolidated
amended complaint on June 1, 2010. See Note 13 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
for additional details and the status of these complaints.
On April 28, 2010, a derivative complaint was filed in the District Court against certain of
our current and former directors and officers alleging breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control,
gross mismanagement, and waste of corporate assets against all the individual defendants, unjust
enrichment against the former executive defendants, and against our independent auditors alleging
professional negligence and breach of contract. See Note 13 to our Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements for additional details. Many of the allegations underlying these claims are
similar or identical to the allegations
54
in the securities class action lawsuits described above. In addition, the claims include
allegations that the director defendants made inappropriate personnel decisions with respect to the
former officers and that the former officers were unjustly enriched, as well as allegations that
our independent auditors performed allegedly inadequate audits. The complaint seeks unspecified
monetary relief, injunctive relief relating to certain corporate governance matters, and attorneys
costs and fees. On June 28, 2010, the plaintiff dismissed our independent auditors from the case,
without prejudice.
On August 17, 2010, two complaints were filed in the District Court against certain of our
current and former directors and officers alleging breach of fiduciary duty. See Note 13 to our
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details.
The parties to the derivative cases filed in fiscal 2008 and the derivative case filed on
April 28, 2010 agreed to participate in the mediation and to stay these derivative cases. These
cases remain stayed while the parties continue with the mediation process. The derivative cases
filed on August 17, 2010 were also stayed by the district court. If these derivative cases do not
end in negotiated resolutions, we will respond to the derivative complaints appropriately.
The parties to the derivative cases pending in the Superior Court and the District Court
agreed to the mediation and to stay their respective cases. If these derivative cases do not end
in negotiated resolutions, we will respond to the two derivative complaints appropriately.
In light of the preliminary status of these lawsuits, we cannot predict the outcome of these
matters. While the outcome of these litigation matters cannot be predicted with any certainty, we
do not believe that the outcome of any current matters will have a material adverse effect on our
consolidated financial position, liquidity or results of operations.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Our business faces many risks. Described below are what we believe to be the material risks
that we face. If any of the events or circumstances described in the following risks actually
occurs, our business, financial condition or results of operations could suffer. The descriptions
below include any material changes to and supersede the description of the risk factors as
previously disclosed in Item 1A to Part I of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended January 2, 2010 and filed with the SEC on February 26, 2010.
Risks Related to Our Business
We are subject to the cyclical nature of the integrated circuit and electronics systems
industries, and any downturn in these industries may reduce our orders and revenue.
Purchases of our products and services are dependent upon the commencement of new design
projects by IC manufacturers and electronics systems companies. The IC and electronics systems
industries are cyclical and are characterized by constant and rapid technological change, rapid
product obsolescence and price erosion, evolving standards, short product life cycles and wide
fluctuations in product supply and demand.
The IC and electronics systems industries experienced significant challenges in 2008 and 2009.
The IC and electronic systems industries have also experienced significant downturns in connection
with, or in anticipation of, maturing product cycles of both these industries and their customers
products. The economic downturn in 2008 and 2009 was characterized by diminished product demand,
production overcapacity, high inventory levels and accelerated erosion of average selling prices.
Although estimates
55
project moderate growth for the semiconductor industry in 2010, we believe that spending on
EDA products and services may grow more slowly than the semiconductor industry as a whole in 2010.
The economic downturn in the industries we serve has contributed to the reduction in our revenue in
the past and could continue to adversely affect our business, operating results and financial
condition.
We have experienced varied operating results, and our operating results for any particular
fiscal period are affected by the timing of significant orders for our software products,
fluctuations in customer preferences for license types and the timing of revenue recognition
under those license types.
We have experienced, and may continue to experience, varied operating results. In particular,
we incurred net losses during the first quarter of fiscal 2010 and the two most recent fiscal
years. We may incur an operating loss during fiscal 2010. Various factors affect our operating
results and some of them are not within our control. Our operating results for any period are
affected by the timing of certain orders for our software products.
Our operating results are also affected by the mix of license types executed in any given
period. We license software using three different license types: subscription, term and perpetual.
Product revenue associated with term and perpetual licenses is generally recognized at the
beginning of the license period, whereas product revenue associated with subscription licenses is
recognized over multiple periods during the term of the license. Revenue may also be deferred under
term and perpetual licenses until payments become due and payable from customers with nonlinear
payment terms or as cash is collected from customers with lower credit ratings. In addition,
revenue is impacted by the timing of license renewals, the extent to which contracts contain
flexible payment terms, changes in existing contractual arrangements with customers and the mix of
license types (i.e., perpetual, term or subscription) for existing customers. These changes could
have the effect of accelerating or delaying the recognition of revenue from the timing of
recognition under the original contract. Our license mix has changed such that a substantial
proportion of licenses require ratable revenue recognition, and we expect the change in license
mix, combined with the slow growth in spending by our customers in the semiconductor sector, may
make it difficult for us to increase our revenue in future fiscal periods.
We plan operating expense levels primarily based on forecasted revenue levels. These expenses
and the impact of long-term commitments are relatively fixed in the short term. In addition,
revenue levels are harder to forecast in a difficult economic environment. A shortfall in revenue
could lead to operating results below expectations because we may not be able to quickly reduce
these expenses in response to short-term business changes.
Since the majority of our contracts are generally executed in the final few weeks of a fiscal
quarter, it is difficult to estimate with accuracy how much business will be executed before the
end of each fiscal quarter. Due to the volume or complexity of transactions that we review at the
very end of the quarter, or due to operational matters regarding particular agreements, we may not
finish processing or ship products under some contracts that have been signed during that fiscal
quarter, which means that the associated revenue cannot be recognized in that particular
period.
The methods, estimates and judgments that we use in applying our accounting policies have
a significant impact on our results of operations (see Critical Accounting Estimates under Item
2, Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations). Such
methods, estimates and judgments are, by their nature, subject to substantial risks, uncertainties
and assumptions, and factors may arise over time that may lead us to change our methods, estimates
and
56
judgments. Changes in those methods, estimates and judgments could significantly affect our
results of operations.
You should not view our historical results of operations as reliable indicators of our future
performance. If our revenue, operating results or business outlook for future periods fall short of
the levels expected by securities analysts or investors, the trading price of our common stock
could decline.
Our operating results and revenue could be adversely affected by customer payment delays,
customer bankruptcies and defaults or modifications of licenses or supplier modifications.
As a result of the challenging economic environment, our customers, who are primarily
concentrated in the semiconductor sector, have experienced and may continue to experience adverse
changes in their business and, as a result, may delay or default on their payment obligations, file
for bankruptcy or modify or cancel plans to license our products, and our suppliers may
significantly and quickly increase their prices or reduce their output. If our customers are not
successful in generating sufficient cash or are precluded from securing financing, they may not be
able to pay, or may delay payment of, accounts receivable that are owed to us, although these
obligations are generally not cancelable. Our customers inability to fulfill payment obligations
may adversely affect our revenue and cash flow. Additionally, our customers may seek to renegotiate
pre-existing contractual commitments. Payment defaults by our customers or significant reductions
in existing contractual commitments could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition
and operating results. Because of the relatively high levels of volatility that continue to drive
material fluctuations in asset prices, the capital and credit markets have contracted, and if we
were to seek funding from the capital or credit markets in response to any material level of
customer defaults, we may not be able to secure funding on terms acceptable to us or at all, which,
may have a material negative impact on our business.
Our failure to respond quickly to technological developments could make our products
uncompetitive and obsolete.
The industries in which we compete experience rapid technology developments, changes in
industry standards and customer requirements and frequent new product introductions and
improvements. Currently, the industries we serve are experiencing the following trends:
|
|
|
Migration to nanometer design the continuous shrinkage of the size of
process features and other features, such as wires, transistors and contacts on ICs, due
to the ongoing advances in the semiconductor manufacturing processes represents a
major challenge for participants in the semiconductor industry, from IC design and
design automation to design of manufacturing equipment and the manufacturing process
itself. Shrinkage of transistor length to such proportions is challenging the industry
in the application of more complex physics and chemistry that is needed to realize
advanced silicon devices. For EDA tools, models of each components electrical
properties and behavior become more complex as do requisite analysis, design and
verification capabilities. Novel design tools and methodologies must be invented quickly
to remain competitive in the design of electronics in the smallest nanometer ranges. |
|
|
|
|
The challenges of nanometer design are leading some customers to work with
older, less risky manufacturing processes that may reduce their need to upgrade or
enhance their EDA products and design flows. |
|
|
|
|
The ability to design SoCs increases the complexity of managing a design
that, at the lowest level, is represented by billions of shapes on the fabrication mask.
In addition, SoCs typically incorporate microprocessors and digital signal processors
that are programmed with |
57
|
|
|
software, requiring simultaneous design of the IC and the related software embedded on
the IC. |
|
|
|
|
With the availability of seemingly endless gate capacity, there is an
increase in design reuse, or the combining of off-the-shelf design IP with custom logic
to create ICs. The unavailability of high-quality design IP that can be reliably
incorporated into a customers design with our IC implementation products and services
could reduce demand for our products and services. |
|
|
|
|
Increased technological capability of the Field-Programmable Gate Array,
which is a programmable logic chip, creates an alternative to IC implementation for some
electronics companies. This could reduce demand for our IC implementation products and
services. |
|
|
|
|
A growing number of low-cost engineering services businesses could reduce
the need for some IC companies to invest in EDA products. |
If we are unable to respond quickly and successfully to these trends, we may lose our
competitive position, and our products or technologies may become uncompetitive or obsolete. To
compete successfully, we must develop or acquire new products and improve our existing products and
processes on a schedule that keeps pace with technological developments and the requirements for
products addressing a broad spectrum of designers and designer expertise in our industries. We must
also be able to support a range of changing computer software, hardware platforms and customer
preferences. We cannot guarantee that we will be successful in this effort.
Our stock price has been subject to significant fluctuations, and may continue to be subject
to fluctuations.
The market price of our common stock has experienced significant fluctuations and may
fluctuate or decline in the future, and as a result you could lose the value of your investment.
The market price of our common stock may be affected by a number of factors, including, but not
limited to:
|
|
|
Announcements of our quarterly operating results and revenue and earnings
forecasts that fail to meet or are inconsistent with earlier projections or the
expectations of our securities analysts or investors; |
|
|
|
|
Changes in our orders, revenue or earnings estimates; |
|
|
|
|
Announcements of a restructuring plan; |
|
|
|
|
Changes in management; |
|
|
|
|
A gain or loss of a significant customer or market segment share; |
|
|
|
|
Announcements of new products or acquisitions of new technologies by us, our
competitors or our customers; and |
|
|
|
|
Market conditions in the IC, electronics systems and semiconductor
industries. |
In addition, equity markets in general, and the equities of technology companies in
particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations. Such price and volume
fluctuations may adversely affect the market price of our common stock for reasons unrelated to our
business or operating results.
Litigation could adversely affect our financial condition or operations.
We are currently, and in the future may be, involved in various disputes and litigation that
arise in the ordinary course of business. These include disputes and lawsuits related to
intellectual property, mergers and acquisitions, licensing, contracts, distribution arrangements
and employee relations matters. We are also currently engaged in a consolidated securities class
action lawsuit and shareholder derivative lawsuits. For information regarding the litigation
matters in which we are currently engaged, please refer to the discussion
58
under Item 1, Legal
Proceedings. We cannot provide any assurances that the final outcome of these lawsuits or any
other proceedings that may arise in the future will not have a material adverse effect on our
business, operating results, financial condition or cash flows. Litigation can be time-consuming
and expensive and could divert managements time and attention from our business, which could have
a material adverse effect on our revenues and operating results.
Our future revenue is dependent in part upon our installed customer base continuing to
license or buy additional products, renew maintenance agreements and purchase additional
services.
Our installed customer base has traditionally generated additional new license, service and
maintenance revenues. In future periods, customers may not necessarily license or buy additional
products or contract for additional services or maintenance. In some cases, maintenance is
renewable annually at a
customers option, and there are no mandatory payment obligations or obligations to license
additional software. If our customers decide not to renew their maintenance agreements or license
additional products or contract for additional services, or if they reduce the scope of the
maintenance agreements, our revenue could decrease, which could have an adverse effect on our
operating results. Our customers, many of which are large semiconductor companies, often have
significant bargaining power in negotiations with us. Mergers or acquisitions of our customers can
reduce the total level of purchases of our software and services, and in some cases, increase
customers bargaining power in negotiations with their suppliers, including us.
We depend upon our management team and key employees, and our failure to attract, train,
motivate and retain management and key employees may make us less competitive in our
industries and therefore harm our results of operations.
Our business depends upon the efforts and abilities of our executive officers and other key
employees, including key development personnel. From time to time, there may be changes in our
management team resulting from the hiring and departure of executive officers, and as a result, we
may experience disruption to our business that may harm our operating results and our relationships
with our employees, customers and suppliers may be adversely affected. Competition for highly
skilled executive officers and employees can be intense, particularly in geographic areas
recognized as high technology centers such as the Silicon Valley area, where our principal offices
are located, and the other locations where we maintain facilities. To attract, retain and motivate
individuals with the requisite expertise, we may be required to grant large numbers of stock
options or other stock-based incentive awards, which may be dilutive to existing stockholders and
increase compensation expense, and pay significant base salaries and cash bonuses, which could harm
our operating results. The high cost of training new employees, not fully utilizing these
employees, or losing trained employees to competing employers could also reduce our operating
margins and harm our business or operating results.
In addition, the NASDAQ Marketplace Rules require stockholder approval for new equity
compensation plans and significant amendments to existing equity compensation plans, including
increases in shares available for issuance under such plans, and prohibit NASDAQ member
organizations from giving a proxy to vote on equity compensation plans unless the beneficial owner
of the shares has given voting instructions. These regulations could make it more difficult for us
to grant equity compensation to employees in the future. To the extent that these regulations make
it more difficult or expensive to grant equity compensation to employees, we may incur increased
compensation costs or find it difficult to attract, retain and motivate employees, which could
materially and adversely affect our business.
59
We may not be able to effectively implement our restructuring plans, and our restructuring
plans may not result in the benefits we have anticipated, possibly having a negative effect
on our future operating results.
During fiscal 2008 and fiscal 2009, we initiated restructuring plans in an effort to decrease
costs by reducing our workforce and by consolidating facilities. We may not be able to successfully
complete and realize the expected benefits of our restructuring plans, such as improvements in
operating margins and cash flows, in the restructuring periods contemplated. The restructuring
plans have involved and may continue to involve higher costs or a longer timetable than we
currently anticipate or may fail to improve our operating results as we anticipate. Our inability
to realize these benefits may result in an inefficient business structure that could negatively
impact our results of operations. Our restructuring plans have caused us and will cause us to incur
substantial costs related to severance and other employee-related costs. Our restructuring plans
may also subject us to litigation risks and expenses. In addition, our restructuring plans may have
other consequences, such as attrition beyond our planned reduction in workforce, a negative impact
on employee
morale or our ability to attract highly skilled employees and our competitors may seek to gain
a competitive advantage over us. The restructuring plans could also cause our remaining employees
to leave or result in reduced productivity by our employees, and, in turn, this may affect our
revenue and other operating results in the future.
We may not receive significant revenue from our current research and development efforts for
several years, if at all.
Developing EDA technology and integrating acquired technology into existing platforms is
expensive, and these investments often require a long time to generate returns. Our strategy
involves significant investments in research and development and related product opportunities. We
believe that we must continue to dedicate a significant amount of resources to our research and
development efforts to maintain and improve our competitive position. However, we cannot ensure
that we will receive significant, if any, revenue from these investments.
The competition in our industries is substantial and we may not be able to continue to
successfully compete in our industries.
The EDA industry and the commercial electronics engineering services industry are highly
competitive. If we fail to compete successfully in these industries, it could seriously harm our
business, operating results or financial condition. To compete in these industries, we must
identify and develop or acquire innovative and cost-competitive EDA products, integrate them into
platforms and market them in a timely manner. We must also gain industry acceptance for our
engineering services and offer better strategic concepts, technical solutions, prices and response
time, or a combination of these factors, than those of our competitors and the internal design
departments of electronics manufacturers. We may not be able to compete successfully in these
industries. Factors that could affect our ability to succeed include:
|
|
|
The development by others of competitive EDA products or platforms and
engineering services, possibly resulting in a shift of customer preferences away from
our products and services and significantly decreased revenue; |
|
|
|
|
Decisions by electronics manufacturers to perform engineering services
internally, rather than purchase these services from outside vendors due to budget
constraints or excess engineering capacity; |
|
|
|
|
The challenges of developing (or acquiring externally-developed) technology
solutions that are adequate and competitive in meeting the requirements of
next-generation design challenges; |
60
|
|
|
The significant number of current and potential competitors in the EDA
industry and the low cost of entry; |
|
|
|
|
Intense competition to attract acquisition targets, possibly making it more
difficult for us to acquire companies or technologies at an acceptable price or at all;
and |
|
|
|
|
The combination of or collaboration among many EDA companies to deliver more
comprehensive offerings than they could individually. |
We compete in the EDA products market with Synopsys, Inc., Magma Design Automation, Inc. and
Mentor Graphics Corporation. We also compete with numerous smaller EDA companies, with
manufacturers of electronic devices that have developed or have the capability to develop their own
EDA products, and with numerous electronics design and consulting companies. Manufacturers of
electronic devices may be reluctant to purchase engineering services from independent vendors such
as us because they wish to promote their own internal design departments.
We may need to change our pricing models to compete successfully.
The highly competitive markets in which we compete can put pressure on us to reduce the
prices of our products. If our competitors offer deep discounts on certain products in an effort to
recapture or gain market segment share or to sell other software or hardware products, we may then
need to lower our prices or offer other favorable terms to compete successfully. Any such changes
would be likely to reduce our profit margins and could adversely affect our operating results. Any
substantial changes to our prices and pricing policies could cause sales and software license
revenues to decline or be delayed as our sales force implements and our customers adjust to the new
pricing policies. Some of our competitors may bundle products for promotional purposes or as a
long-term pricing strategy or provide guarantees of prices and product implementations. These
practices could, over time, significantly constrain the prices that we can charge for our products.
If we cannot offset price reductions with a corresponding increase in the number of sales or with
lower spending, then the reduced license revenues resulting from lower prices could have an adverse
effect on our results of operations.
We have acquired and expect to acquire other companies and businesses and may not
realize the expected benefits of these acquisitions.
We have acquired and expect to acquire other companies and businesses in the future. While we
expect to carefully analyze each potential acquisition before committing to the transaction, we may
not consummate any particular transaction, but may nonetheless incur significant costs, or if a
transaction is consummated, we may not be able to integrate and manage acquired products and
businesses effectively. In addition, acquisitions involve a number of risks. If any of the
following events occurs when we acquire another business, it could seriously harm our business,
operating results or financial condition:
|
|
|
Difficulties in combining previously separate businesses into a single unit; |
|
|
|
|
The substantial diversion of managements attention from day-to-day business
when evaluating and negotiating these transactions and integrating an acquired business; |
|
|
|
|
The discovery, after completion of the acquisition, of unanticipated
liabilities assumed from the acquired business or of assets acquired, such that we
cannot realize the anticipated value of the acquisition; |
|
|
|
|
The failure to realize anticipated benefits such as cost savings and revenue
enhancements; |
|
|
|
|
The failure to retain key employees of the acquired business; |
|
|
|
|
Difficulties related to integrating the products of an acquired business in,
for example, distribution, engineering and customer support areas; |
|
|
|
|
Unanticipated costs; |
61
|
|
|
Customer dissatisfaction with existing license agreements with us, possibly
dissuading them from licensing or buying products acquired by us after the effective
date of the license; and |
|
|
|
|
The failure to understand and compete effectively in markets where we have
limited experience. |
In a number of our previously completed acquisitions, we have agreed to make future payments,
either in the form of employee bonuses or contingent purchase price payments based on the
performance of the acquired businesses or the employees who joined us with the acquired businesses.
We may continue to agree to contingent purchase price payments in connection with acquisitions in
the future. The performance goals pursuant to which these future payments may be made generally
relate to achievement by the acquired business or the employees who joined us with the acquired
business of certain specified orders, revenue, run rate, product proliferation, product development
or employee retention goals during a specified period following completion of the applicable
acquisition. Future acquisitions may involve issuances of stock as full or partial payment of the
purchase price for the acquired business, grants of incentive stock or options to
employees of the acquired businesses (which may be dilutive to existing stockholders),
expenditure of substantial cash resources or the incurrence of material amounts of debt.
The specific performance goal levels and amounts and timing of employee bonuses or contingent
purchase price payments vary with each acquisition. While we expect to derive value from an
acquisition in excess of such contingent payment obligations, our strategy may change and we may be
required to make certain contingent payments without deriving the anticipated value.
We rely on our proprietary technology, as well as software and other intellectual property
rights licensed to us by third parties, and we cannot assure you that the precautions taken
to protect our rights will be adequate or that we will continue to be able to adequately
secure such intellectual property rights from third parties.
Our success depends, in part, upon our proprietary technology. We generally rely on patents,
copyrights, trademarks, trade secret laws, licenses and restrictive agreements to establish and
protect our proprietary rights in technology and products. Despite the precautions we may take to
protect our intellectual property, third parties have tried in the past, and may try in the future,
to challenge, invalidate or circumvent these safeguards. The rights granted under our patents or
attendant to our other intellectual property may not provide us with any competitive advantages.
Patents may not be issued on any of our pending applications and our issued patents may not be
sufficiently broad to protect our technology. Furthermore, the laws of foreign countries may not
protect our proprietary rights in those countries to the same extent as applicable law protects
these rights in the United States. The protection of our intellectual property may require the
expenditure of significant financial and managerial resources. Moreover, the steps we take to
protect our intellectual property may not adequately protect our rights or prevent third parties
from infringing or misappropriating our proprietary rights.
Many of our products include software or other intellectual property licensed from third
parties. We may have to seek new or renew existing licenses for such software and other
intellectual property in the future. Our engineering services business holds licenses to certain
software and other intellectual property owned by third parties, including that of our competitors.
Our failure to obtain software or other intellectual property licenses or other intellectual
property rights that is necessary or helpful for our business on favorable terms, or the need to
engage in litigation over these licenses or rights, could seriously harm our business, operating
results or financial condition.
62
We could lose key technology or suffer serious harm to our business because of the
infringement of our intellectual property rights by third parties or because of our
infringement of the intellectual property rights of third parties.
There are numerous patents in the EDA industry and new patents are being issued at a rapid
rate. It is not always practicable to determine in advance whether a product or any of its
components infringes the patent rights of others. As a result, from time to time, we may be
compelled to respond to or prosecute intellectual property infringement claims to protect our
rights or defend a customers rights.
Intellectual property infringement claims, regardless of merit, could consume valuable
management time, result in costly litigation, or cause product shipment delays, all of which could
seriously harm our business, operating results or financial condition. In settling these claims, we
may be required to enter into royalty or licensing agreements with the third parties claiming
infringement. These royalty or licensing agreements, if available, may not have terms favorable to
us. Being compelled to enter into a license agreement with unfavorable terms could seriously harm
our business, operating results or financial condition. Any potential intellectual property
litigation could compel us to do one or more of the following:
|
|
|
Pay damages (including the potential for treble damages), license fees or
royalties (including royalties for past periods) to the party claiming infringement; |
|
|
|
|
Stop licensing products or providing services that use the challenged
intellectual property; |
|
|
|
|
Obtain a license from the owner of the infringed intellectual property to
sell or use the relevant technology, which license may not be available on reasonable
terms, or at all; or |
|
|
|
|
Redesign the challenged technology, which could be time-consuming and
costly, or not be accomplished. |
If we were compelled to take any of these actions, our business or operating results may
suffer.
If our security measures are breached and an unauthorized party obtains access to customer
data, our information systems may be perceived as being unsecure and customers may curtail or
stop their use of our products and services.
Our products and services involve the storage and transmission of customers proprietary
information, and breaches of our security measures could expose us to a risk of loss or misuse of
this information, litigation and potential liability. Because techniques used to obtain
unauthorized access or to sabotage information systems change frequently and generally are not
recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or to
implement adequate preventive measures. If an actual or perceived breach of our security occurs,
the market perception of the effectiveness of our security measures could be harmed and we could
lose existing customers and our ability to obtain new customers.
The long sales cycle of our products and services makes the timing of our revenue difficult
to predict and may cause our operating results to fluctuate unexpectedly.
Generally, we have a long sales cycle that can extend up to six months or longer. The
complexity and expense associated with our business generally require a lengthy customer education,
evaluation and approval process. Consequently, we may incur substantial expenses and devote
significant management effort and expense to develop potential relationships that do not result in
agreements or revenue and may prevent us from pursuing other opportunities.
In addition, sales of our products and services have been and may in the future be delayed if
customers delay approval or commencement of projects because of:
63
|
|
|
The timing of customers competitive evaluation processes; or |
|
|
|
|
Customers budgetary constraints and budget cycles. |
Long sales cycles for acceleration and emulation hardware products subject us to a number of
significant risks over which we have limited control, including insufficient, excess or obsolete
inventory, variations in inventory valuation and fluctuations in quarterly operating results.
A significant portion of our contracts are executed in the final few weeks of a fiscal
quarter. This makes it difficult to determine with accuracy how much business will be executed in
each fiscal quarter. Also, because of the timing of large orders and our customers buying
patterns, we may not learn of orders shortfalls, revenue shortfalls, earnings shortfalls or other
failures to meet market expectations until late in a fiscal quarter. These factors may cause our
operating results to fluctuate unexpectedly, which can cause significant fluctuations in the
trading price of our common stock.
Our reported financial results may be adversely affected by changes in United States
generally accepted accounting principles.
United States generally accepted accounting principles are subject to interpretation by the
Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants, the SEC and various bodies formed to promulgate and interpret appropriate accounting
principles. A change in these principles or interpretations could have a significant effect on our
reported financial results, and could affect the reporting of transactions completed before the
announcement of a change. In addition, the SEC has announced a multi-year plan that could
ultimately lead to the use of International Financial Reporting Standards by United States issuers
in their SEC filings. Any such change could have a significant effect on our reported financial
results.
The effect of foreign exchange rate fluctuations and other risks to our international
operations may seriously harm our financial condition.
We have significant operations outside the United States. Our revenue from international
operations as a percentage of total revenue was approximately 57% during the three months ended
October 2, 2010 and 59% during the three months ended October 3, 2009, a substantial portion of
which is denominated in United States dollars. We expect that revenue from our international operations will
continue to account for a significant portion of our total revenue. We also transact business in
various foreign currencies, primarily the Japanese yen. The volatility of foreign currencies in
certain regions, most notably the Japanese yen, European Union euro, British pound and Indian rupee
have had, and may in the future have, a harmful effect on our revenue or operating results.
Fluctuations in the rate of exchange between the United States dollar and the currencies of
other countries where we conduct business could seriously harm our business, operating results or
financial condition. For example, when a foreign currency declines in value relative to the United
States dollar, it takes more of the foreign currency to purchase the same amount of United States
dollars than before the change. If we price our products and services in the foreign currency, we
receive fewer United States dollars than we did before the change. If we price our products and
services in United States dollars, the decrease in value of the local currency results in an
increase in the price for our products and services compared to those products of our competitors
that are priced in local currency. This could result in our prices being uncompetitive in markets
where business is transacted in the local currency. On the other hand, when a foreign currency
increases in value relative to the United States dollar, it takes more United States dollars to
purchase the same amount of the foreign currency. As we use the foreign currency to pay for payroll
costs
64
and other operating expenses in our international operations, this results in an increase in
operating expenses.
Exposure to foreign currency transaction risk can arise when transactions are conducted in a
currency different from the functional currency of one of our subsidiaries. A subsidiarys
functional currency is generally the currency in which it primarily conducts its operations,
including product pricing, expenses and borrowings. Although we attempt to reduce the impact of
foreign currency fluctuations, significant exchange rate movements may hurt our results of
operations as expressed in United States dollars.
Our international operations may also be subject to other risks, including:
|
|
|
The adoption or expansion of government trade restrictions, including
tariffs and other trade barriers; |
|
|
|
|
Limitations on repatriation of earnings; |
|
|
|
|
Limitations on the conversion of foreign currencies; |
|
|
|
|
Reduced protection of intellectual property rights in some countries; |
|
|
|
|
Recessions in foreign economies; |
|
|
|
|
Longer collection periods for receivables and greater difficulty in
collecting accounts receivable; |
|
|
|
|
Difficulties in managing foreign operations; |
|
|
|
|
Compliance with United States and foreign laws and regulations applicable to
our worldwide operations; |
|
|
|
|
Political and economic instability; |
|
|
|
|
Unexpected changes in regulatory requirements; and |
|
|
|
|
United States and other governments licensing requirements for exports,
which may lengthen the sales cycle or restrict or prohibit the sale or licensing of
certain products. |
We have offices throughout the world, including key research and development facilities
outside of the United States. Our operations are dependent upon the connectivity of our operations
throughout the world. Activities that interfere with our international connectivity, such as
computer hacking or the introduction of a virus into our computer systems, could significantly
interfere with our business operations.
Our operating results could be adversely affected as a result of changes in our effective tax
rates.
Our future effective tax rates could be adversely affected by the following:
|
|
|
Changes in tax laws or the interpretation of such tax laws, including
potential United States and international tax reforms; |
|
|
|
|
Earnings being lower than anticipated in countries where we are taxed at
lower rates as compared to the United States federal and state statutory tax rates; |
|
|
|
|
An increase in expenses not deductible for tax purposes, including certain
stock-based compensation and impairment of goodwill; |
|
|
|
|
Changes in the valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets; |
|
|
|
|
Changes in judgment from the evaluation of new information that results in a
recognition, derecognition, or change in measurement of a tax position taken in a prior
period; |
|
|
|
|
Increases to interest expenses classified in the financial statements as
income taxes; |
|
|
|
|
New accounting standards or interpretations of such standards; |
|
|
|
|
A change in our decision to indefinitely reinvest foreign earnings outside
the United States; or |
|
|
|
|
Results of tax examinations by the IRS and state and foreign tax
authorities.
|
65
Any significant change in our future effective tax rates could adversely impact our results of
operations for future periods.
We have received examination reports from the IRS proposing deficiencies in certain of our
tax returns, and the outcome of current and future tax examinations may have a material
adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows.
The IRS and other tax authorities regularly examine our income tax returns, and the IRS is
currently examining our federal income tax returns for the tax years 2006 through 2008.
In
July 2006, the IRS completed its field examination of our federal
income tax returns for the tax years 2000 through 2002 and issued a RAR
in which the IRS proposed to assess an aggregate tax deficiency for
the three-year period of approximately $324.0 million. In November
2006, the IRS revised the proposed aggregate tax deficiency for the
three-year period to be approximately $318.0 million. In October
2010, the Appeals Office of the IRS, or the Appeals Office, provided us with copies of the
settlement agreements that were executed by the Appeals Office in August 2010 that resolve the
previously disputed 2000 through 2002 tax positions. While we did not receive the final IRS determination of the
amount that will be owed by us, we consider the tax positions to be effectively settled, because
the IRS has completed its examination procedures and we believe that there is a remote possibility
that the IRS will re-examine the settled tax positions.
In May 2009, the IRS completed its field examination of our federal income tax returns for
the tax years 2003 through 2005 and issued a RAR, in which the IRS proposed to assess an aggregate
deficiency for the three-year period of approximately $94.1 million. In August 2009, the IRS
revised the proposed aggregate tax deficiency for the three-year period to approximately $60.7
million. The IRS is contesting our transfer pricing arrangements with our foreign subsidiaries and
deductions for foreign trade income. The IRS made similar claims against our transfer pricing
arrangements and deductions for foreign trade income in prior examinations and may make similar
claims in its examinations of other tax years. We have filed a timely protest with the IRS and are
seeking resolution of the issues through the Appeals Office.
We believe that the proposed IRS adjustments are inconsistent with applicable tax laws and we
are vigorously challenging these proposed adjustments, although there can be no assurance that we
will prevail. The RARs are not final Statutory Notices of Deficiency, but the IRS imposes interest
on the proposed deficiencies until the matters are resolved. Interest is compounded daily at rates
published and adjusted quarterly by the IRS and have been between 4% and 10% since 2001.
The calculation of our provision (benefit) for income taxes requires us to use significant
judgment and involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex tax laws and
regulations. In determining the adequacy of our provision (benefit) for income taxes, we regularly
assess the potential settlement outcomes resulting from income tax examinations. However, the final
outcome of tax examinations, including the total amount payable or the timing of any such payments
upon resolution of these issues, cannot be estimated with certainty. In addition, we cannot be
certain that such amount will not be materially different from the amount that is reflected in our
historical income tax provisions and accruals. Should the IRS or other tax authorities assess
additional taxes as a result of a current or a future examination, including the examination that
we consider effectively settled, we may be required to record charges to operations in future
periods that could have a material impact on the results of operations, financial position or cash
flows in the applicable period or periods.
Forecasting our estimated annual effective tax rate is complex and subject to uncertainty,
and material differences between forecasted and actual tax rates could have a material impact
on our results of operations.
Forecasts of our income tax position and resultant effective tax rate are complex and subject
to uncertainty because our income tax position for each year combines the effects of estimating our
annual
66
income or loss, the mix of profits and losses earned by us and our subsidiaries in tax
jurisdictions with a broad range of income tax rates, as well as benefits from available deferred
tax assets, the impact of various accounting rules and changes to these rules and results of tax
audits. To forecast our global tax rate, pre-tax profits and losses by jurisdiction are estimated
and tax expense by jurisdiction is calculated based on such estimates. Forecasts of annual income
or loss that are near break-even will cause our estimated annual effective tax rate to be
particularly sensitive to any changes to our estimates of tax expense. If our estimate of the
pre-tax profit and losses, the mix of our profits and losses, our ability to use deferred tax
assets, the results of tax audits, or effective tax rates by jurisdiction is different than those
estimates, our actual tax rate could be materially different than forecasted, which could have a
material impact on our results of operations.
Failure to obtain export licenses could harm our business by rendering us unable to ship
products and transfer our technology outside of the United States.
We must comply with regulations of the United States and of certain other countries in
shipping our software products and transferring our technology outside the United States and to
foreign nationals. Any significant future difficulty in complying could harm our business,
operating results or financial condition.
Errors or defects in our products and services could expose us to liability and harm our
reputation.
Our customers use our products and services in designing and developing products that involve
a high degree of technological complexity, each of which has its own specifications. Because of the
complexity of the systems and products with which we work, some of our products and designs can be
adequately tested only when put to full use in the marketplace. As a result, our customers or their
end users may discover errors or defects in our software or the systems we design, or the products
or systems incorporating our design and intellectual property may not operate as expected. Errors
or defects could result in:
|
|
|
Loss of customers; |
|
|
|
|
Loss of market segment share; |
|
|
|
|
Failure to attract new customers or achieve market acceptance; |
|
|
|
|
Diversion of development resources to resolve the problem; |
|
|
|
|
Loss of or delay in revenue; |
|
|
|
|
Increased service costs; and |
|
|
|
|
Liability for damages. |
If we become subject to unfair hiring claims, we could be prevented from hiring needed
employees, incur liability for damages and incur substantial costs in defending ourselves.
Companies in our industry that lose employees to competitors frequently claim that these
competitors have engaged in unfair hiring practices or that the employment of these persons would
involve the disclosure or use of trade secrets. These claims could prevent us from hiring employees
or cause us to incur liability for damages. We could also incur substantial costs in defending
ourselves or our employees against these claims, regardless of their merits. Defending ourselves
from these claims could also divert the attention of our management away from our operations.
67
Our business is subject to the risk of earthquakes.
Our corporate headquarters, including certain of our research and development operations and
certain of our distribution facilities, is located in the Silicon Valley area of Northern
California, a region known to experience seismic activity. If significant seismic activity were to
occur, our operations may be interrupted, which would adversely impact our business and results of
operations.
We maintain research and development and other facilities in parts of the world that are not
as politically stable as the United States, and as a result we may face a higher risk of
business interruption from acts of war or terrorism than businesses located only or primarily
in the United States.
We maintain international research and development and other facilities, some of which are in
parts of the world that are not as politically stable as the United States. Consequently, we may
face a greater risk
of business interruption as a result of terrorist acts or military conflicts than businesses
located domestically. Furthermore, this potential harm is exacerbated given that damage to or
disruptions at our international research and development facilities could have an adverse effect
on our ability to develop new or improve existing products as compared to other businesses which
may only have sales offices or other less critical operations abroad. We are not insured for losses
or interruptions caused by acts of war or terrorism.
Risks Related to Our Securities and Indebtedness
Our debt obligations expose us to risks that could adversely affect our business, operating
results or financial condition, and could prevent us from fulfilling our obligations under
such indebtedness.
We have a substantial level of debt. As of October 2, 2010, we had outstanding indebtedness
with a principal balance of $650.2 million as follows:
|
|
|
$350.0 million related to our 2015 Notes; |
|
|
|
|
$150.0 million related to our 2011 Notes; |
|
|
|
|
$150.0 million related to our 2013 Notes; and |
|
|
|
|
$0.2 million related to our Zero Coupon Zero Yield Senior Convertible Notes
Due 2023, or the 2023 Notes. |
The level of our current or future indebtedness, among other things, could:
|
|
|
Make it difficult for us to satisfy our payment obligations on our debt as
described below; |
|
|
|
|
Make us more vulnerable in the event of a downturn in our business; |
|
|
|
|
Reduce funds available for use in our operations or for developments or
acquisitions of new technologies; |
|
|
|
|
Make it difficult for us to incur additional debt or obtain any necessary
financing in the future for working capital, capital expenditures, debt service,
acquisitions or general corporate purposes; |
|
|
|
|
Impose operating or financial covenants on us; |
|
|
|
|
Limit our flexibility in planning for or reacting to changes in our
business; or |
|
|
|
|
Place us at a possible competitive disadvantage relative to less leveraged
competitors and competitors that have greater access to capital resources. |
68
While we are not currently a party to any loans that would prohibit us from making payment on
our outstanding convertible notes, we are not prevented by the terms of the convertible notes from
entering into other loans that could prohibit such payments. If we are prohibited from paying our
outstanding indebtedness, we could try to obtain the consent of the lenders under those
arrangements to make such payment, or we could attempt to refinance the borrowings that contain the
restrictions. If we do not obtain the necessary consents or refinance the borrowings, we may be
unable to satisfy our outstanding indebtedness. Any such failure would constitute an event of
default under our indebtedness, which could, in turn, constitute a default under the terms of any
other indebtedness then outstanding.
If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow or otherwise obtain funds necessary to make
required payments, or if we fail to comply with the various requirements of our indebtedness, we
would be in default, which would permit the holders of our indebtedness to accelerate the maturity
of the indebtedness and could cause defaults under any other indebtedness as well.
Any default under our indebtedness could have a material adverse effect on our business,
operating results and financial condition. In addition, a material default on our indebtedness
could suspend our eligibility to register securities using certain registration statement forms
under SEC guidelines that permit incorporation by reference of substantial information regarding us
and potentially hindering our ability to raise capital through the issuance of our securities and
will increase the costs of such registration to us.
On the first day of fiscal 2009, we retrospectively adopted new accounting principles as
required by the Debt with Conversion and Other Options subtopic of the FASB Accounting Standards
Codification, and adjusted all periods for which the Convertible Senior Notes were outstanding
before the date of adoption. This adoption had an adverse effect on our operating results and
financial condition, particularly with respect to interest expense ratios commonly referred to by
lenders, and could potentially hinder our ability to raise capital through the issuance of debt or
equity securities.
Conversion of the Convertible Senior Notes will dilute the ownership interests of existing
stockholders.
The terms of the Convertible Senior Notes permit the holders to convert the Convertible Senior
Notes into shares of our common stock. The terms of the Convertible Senior Notes stipulate a net
share settlement, which upon conversion of the Convertible Senior Notes requires us to pay the
principal amount in cash and the conversion premium, if any, in shares of our common stock based on
a daily settlement amount, calculated on a proportionate basis for each day of the relevant 20
trading-day observation period. The initial conversion rate for the Convertible Senior Notes is
47.2813 shares of our common stock per $1,000 principal amount of Convertible Senior Notes,
equivalent to a conversion price of approximately $21.15 per share of our common stock. The
conversion price is subject to adjustment in some events but will not be adjusted for accrued
interest, except in limited circumstances. The conversion of some or all of the Convertible Senior
Notes will dilute the ownership interest of our existing stockholders. Any sales in the public
market of the common stock issuable upon conversion could adversely affect prevailing market prices
of our common stock.
Each $1,000 of principal of the Convertible Senior Notes is initially convertible into 47.2813
shares of our common stock, subject to adjustment upon the occurrence of specified events. Holders
of the Convertible Senior Notes may convert their notes at their option on any day before the close
of business on the scheduled trading day immediately preceding December 15, 2011 in the case of the
2011 Notes and December 15, 2013 in the case of the 2013 Notes, in each case only if:
69
|
|
|
The price of our common stock reaches $27.50 during certain periods of time
specified in the Convertible Senior Notes; |
|
|
|
|
Specified corporate transactions occur; or |
|
|
|
|
The trading price of the Convertible Senior Notes falls below 98% of the
product of (i) the last reported sale price of our common stock and (ii) the conversion
rate on that date. |
From November 2, 2011, in the case of the 2011 Notes, and November 1, 2013, in the case of the
2013 Notes, and until the close of business on the scheduled trading day immediately preceding the
maturity date of such Convertible Senior Notes, holders may convert their Convertible Senior Notes
at any time, regardless of the foregoing circumstances. As of October 2, 2010, none of the
conditions allowing holders of the Convertible Senior Notes to convert had been met.
Although the conversion price of the Convertible Senior Notes is currently $21.15 per share,
we entered into hedge and separate warrant transactions concurrent with the issuance of the
Convertible Senior Notes to reduce the potential dilution from the conversion of the Convertible
Senior Notes. However, we cannot guarantee that such hedges and warrant instruments will fully
mitigate the dilution. In addition, the existence of the Convertible Senior Notes may encourage
short selling by market participants because the conversion of the Convertible Senior Notes could
depress the price of our common stock.
At the option of the holders of the Convertible Senior Notes and the 2015 Notes, under
certain circumstances we may be required to repurchase the Convertible Senior Notes in cash
or shares of our common stock, or repurchase the 2015 Notes in cash.
Under the terms of the Convertible Senior Notes and the 2015 Notes, we may be required to
repurchase the Convertible Senior Notes and the 2015 Notes following a fundamental change in our
corporate ownership or structure, such as a change of control in which substantially all of the
consideration does not consist of publicly traded securities, prior to maturity of the Convertible
Senior Notes and the 2015 Notes. The repurchase price for the Convertible Senior Notes and the 2015
Notes in the event of a fundamental change must be paid solely in cash. This repayment obligation
may have the effect of discouraging, delaying or preventing a takeover of our company that may
otherwise be beneficial to investors.
Hedge and warrant transactions entered into in connection with the issuance of the
Convertible Senior Notes and the 2015 Notes may affect the value of our common stock.
We entered into hedge transactions with various financial institutions, at the time of
issuance of the Convertible Senior Notes and the 2015 Notes, with the objective of reducing the
potential dilutive effect of issuing our common stock upon conversion of the Convertible Senior
Notes and the potential cash outlay from the cash conversion of the 2015 Notes. We also entered
into separate warrant transactions with the same financial institutions. In connection with our
hedge and warrant transactions associated with the Convertible Senior Notes and the 2015 Notes,
these financial institutions purchased our common stock in secondary market transactions and
entered into various over-the-counter derivative transactions with respect to our common stock.
These entities or their affiliates are likely to modify their hedge positions from time to time
prior to conversion or maturity of the Convertible Senior Notes and the 2015 Notes by purchasing
and selling shares of our common stock, other of our securities or other instruments they may wish
to use in connection with such hedging. Any of these transactions and activities could adversely
affect the value of our common stock and, as a result, the number of shares and the value of the
common stock holders will receive upon conversion of the Convertible Senior Notes and the 2015
Notes. In addition, subject to movement in the price of our common stock, if the hedge transactions
settle in our favor, we could be exposed to credit risk related to the other party with respect to
the payment we are owed from such other
70
party. If the financial institutions with which we entered
into these hedge transactions were to fail or default, our ability to settle on these transactions
could be harmed or delayed.
We are subject to the risk that the hedge participants cannot, or do not, fulfill their
obligations under the convertible note hedge transactions.
Recent global economic conditions have resulted in the actual or perceived failure or
financial difficulties of many financial institutions. If any of the participants in the hedge
transactions is unwilling or unable to perform its obligations for any reason, we would not be able
to receive the benefit of such transaction. We cannot provide any assurances as to the financial
stability or viability of any of the participants in the hedge transactions.
Rating agencies may provide unsolicited ratings on the Convertible Senior Notes and the 2015
Notes that could reduce the market value or liquidity of our common stock.
We have not requested a rating of the Convertible Senior Notes or the 2015 Notes from any
rating agency and we do not anticipate that the Convertible Senior Notes or the 2015 Notes will be
rated. However, if one or more rating agencies independently elects to rate the Convertible Senior
Notes or the 2015 Notes and assigns the Convertible Senior Notes or the 2015 Notes a rating lower
than the rating expected by investors, or reduces such rating in the future, the market price or
liquidity of the Convertible Senior Notes or the 2015 Notes, as the case may be, and our common
stock could be harmed. Should a decline in the market price of the Convertible Senior Notes or the
2015 Notes result, as compared to the price of our common stock, this may trigger the right of the
holders of the Convertible Senior Notes or the 2015 Notes to convert such notes into cash and
shares of our common stock, as applicable.
Anti-takeover defenses in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and certain provisions
under Delaware law could prevent an acquisition of our company or limit the price that
investors might be willing to pay for our common stock.
Our certificate of incorporation and bylaws and certain provisions of the Delaware General
Corporation Law that apply to us could make it difficult for another company to acquire control of
our company. For example:
|
|
|
Our certificate of incorporation allows our Board of Directors to issue, at
any time and without stockholder approval, preferred stock with such terms as it may
determine. No shares of preferred stock are currently outstanding. However, the rights
of holders of any of our preferred stock that may be issued in the future may be
superior to the rights of holders of our common stock. |
|
|
|
|
Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law generally prohibits a
Delaware corporation from engaging in any business combination with a person owning 15%
or more of its voting stock, or who is affiliated with the corporation and owned 15% or
more of its voting stock at any time within three years prior to the proposed business
combination, for a period of three years from the date the person became a 15% owner,
unless specified conditions are met. |
All or any one of these factors could limit the price that certain investors would be willing
to pay for shares of our common stock and could allow our Board of Directors to resist, delay or
prevent an acquisition of our company, even if a proposed transaction were favored by a majority of
our independent stockholders.
71
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
During fiscal 2008, our Board of Directors authorized two programs to repurchase shares of our
common stock in the open market with a value of up to $1,000.0 million in the aggregate. The
following table sets forth the repurchases we made during the three months ended October 2, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum Dollar |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value of Shares that |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number of |
|
|
May Yet |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares Purchased |
|
|
Be Purchased Under |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Average |
|
|
as Part of |
|
|
Publicly Announced |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Price |
|
|
Publicly Announced |
|
|
Plan or Program * |
|
Period |
|
Purchased * |
|
|
Per Share |
|
|
Plan or Program |
|
|
(In millions) |
|
July 4, 2010
August 7,
2010 |
|
|
21,347 |
|
|
$ |
6.80 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
$ |
814.4 |
|
August 8, 2010
September
4, 2010 |
|
|
42,548 |
|
|
$ |
6.81 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
$ |
814.4 |
|
September 5, 2010
October 2, 2010 |
|
|
171,563 |
|
|
$ |
7.76 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
$ |
814.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
235,458 |
|
|
$ |
7.50 |
|
|
|
---- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Shares purchased that were not part of our publicly announced repurchase program represent
the surrender of shares of restricted stock to pay income taxes due upon vesting, and do not
reduce the dollar value that may yet be purchased under our publicly announced repurchase
program. |
Item 3. Defaults Upon Senior Securities
None.
Item 4. Reserved
Item 5. Other Information
None.
72
Item 6. Exhibits
(a) The following exhibits are filed herewith:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incorporated by Reference |
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Filing |
|
Provided |
Number |
|
Exhibit Title |
|
Form |
|
File No. |
|
No. |
|
Date |
|
Herewith |
|
10.01
|
|
Executive Transition and Release
Agreement, dated September 24, 2010
between the Registrant and Kevin S.
Palatnik
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
10.02
|
|
Offer Letter, executed September 24, 2010
between the Registrant and Geoff Ribar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
31.01
|
|
Certification of the Registrants Chief
Executive Officer, Lip-Bu Tan, pursuant
to Rule 13a-14 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
31.02
|
|
Certification of the Registrants Chief
Financial Officer, Kevin S. Palatnik,
pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
32.01
|
|
Certification of the Registrants Chief
Executive Officer, Lip-Bu Tan, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
32.02
|
|
Certification of the Registrants Chief
Financial Officer, Kevin S. Palatnik,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
101.INS
|
|
XBRL Instance Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
101.SCH
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
101.CAL
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation
Linkbase Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
101.LAB
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase
Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
101.PRE
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation
Linkbase Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
73
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CADENCE DESIGN SYSTEMS, INC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Registrant) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DATE:
|
|
October 29, 2010
|
|
By:
|
|
/s/ Lip-Bu Tan |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lip-Bu Tan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DATE:
|
|
October 29, 2010
|
|
By:
|
|
/s/ Kevin S. Palatnik |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kevin S. Palatnik |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
74
EXHIBIT INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incorporated by Reference |
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
Filing |
|
Provided |
Number |
|
Exhibit Title |
|
Form |
|
File No. |
|
No. |
|
Date |
|
Herewith |
|
10.01
|
|
Executive Transition and Release
Agreement, dated September 24, 2010
between the Registrant and Kevin S.
Palatnik
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
10.02
|
|
Offer Letter, executed September 24, 2010
between the Registrant and Geoff Ribar
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
31.01
|
|
Certification of the Registrants Chief
Executive Officer, Lip-Bu Tan, pursuant
to Rule 13a-14 of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
31.02
|
|
Certification of the Registrants Chief
Financial Officer, Kevin S. Palatnik,
pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
32.01
|
|
Certification of the Registrants Chief
Executive Officer, Lip-Bu Tan, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
32.02
|
|
Certification of the Registrants Chief
Financial Officer, Kevin S. Palatnik,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
101.INS
|
|
XBRL Instance Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
101.SCH
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
101.CAL
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation
Linkbase Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
101.LAB
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase
Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
101.PRE
|
|
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation
Linkbase Document.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
X |
75