e10vk
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ
|
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the fiscal
year ended December 31,
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: 000-49834
Gen-Probe
Incorporated
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
33-0044608
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification Number)
|
|
|
|
10210 Genetic Center Drive, San Diego, CA
(Address of principal
executive office)
|
|
92121-4362
(Zip
Code)
|
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
(858) 410-8000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
Title of Each Class
|
|
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered
|
|
Common Stock, par value $0.0001 per share
|
|
Nasdaq Global Select Market
|
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark 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 þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of the registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
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 þ
|
Accelerated filer o
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
Smaller reporting company o
|
(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
Act). Yes o No þ
As of June 30, 2010, the last business day of the
registrants most recently completed second fiscal quarter,
the aggregate market value of the registrants common stock
held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately
$1.9 billion, based on the closing price of the
registrants common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select
Market on that date. Shares of common stock held by each officer
and director and by each person who owns 10 percent or more
of the outstanding common stock have been excluded because these
persons may be considered affiliates. The determination of
affiliate status for purposes of this calculation is not
necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.
As of February 18, 2011, 48,278,460 shares of
registrants common stock, $0.0001 par value, were
outstanding.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the Companys definitive Proxy Statement to be
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within
120 days after the close of the fiscal year are
incorporated by reference into Part III of this report.
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FORM 10-K
For the Year Ended December 31, 2010
INDEX
i
PART I
TRADEMARKS
AND TRADE NAMES
ACCUPROBE, AMPLIFIED MTD, APTIMA, APTIMA COMBO 2, DTS,
ELUCIGENE, GASDIRECT, GEN-PROBE, GTI DIAGNOSTICS, LEADER,
LIFECODES, PACE, PANTHER, PROADENO, PRODESSE, PROFAST, PROFLU,
PROGASTRO, PROGENSA, TIGRIS and our other logos and trademarks
are the property of Gen-Probe Incorporated or its subsidiaries.
PROCLEIX and ULTRIO are trademarks of Novartis
Vaccines & Diagnostics, Inc., or Novartis. XMAP is a
trademark of Luminex Corporation, or Luminex. AVODART is a
trademark of GlaxoSmithKline. All other brand names or
trademarks appearing in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
or Annual Report, are the property of their respective holders.
Use or display by us of other parties trademarks, trade
dress or products in this Annual Report does not imply a
relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of, us by the
trademark or trade dress owners.
FORWARD-LOOKING
STATEMENTS
This Annual Report and the information incorporated herein by
reference contain forward-looking statements that involve a
number of risks and uncertainties, as well as assumptions that,
if they never materialize or if they prove incorrect, could
cause our results to differ materially from those expressed or
implied by such forward-looking statements. Although our
forward-looking statements reflect the good faith judgment of
our management, these statements can only be based on facts and
factors currently known by us. Consequently, forward-looking
statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties,
and actual results and outcomes may differ materially from
results and outcomes expressed or implied by the forward-looking
statements.
Forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of
forward-looking words such as believes,
expects, hopes, may,
will, plans, intends,
estimates, could, should,
would, continue, seeks or
anticipates, or other similar words (including their
use in the negative), or by discussions of future matters, such
as the development and commercialization of new products,
technology enhancements, regulatory approvals or clearance,
possible changes in legislation and other statements that are
not historical. These statements include, but are not limited
to, statements under the captions Business,
Risk Factors, and Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations, as well as other sections in this Annual
Report. You should be aware that the occurrence of any of the
events discussed under the heading
Item 1A Risk Factors and elsewhere
in this Annual Report could substantially harm our business,
results of operations and financial condition. If any of these
events occurs, the trading price of our common stock could
decline and you could lose all or a part of the value of your
shares of our common stock.
The cautionary statements made in this Annual Report are
intended to be applicable to all related forward-looking
statements wherever they may appear in this Annual Report. We
urge you not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking
statements, which speak only as of the date of this Annual
Report.
USE OF
EXTERNAL ESTIMATES
This Annual Report includes market share and industry data and
forecasts that we obtained from industry publications and
surveys. Industry publications, surveys and forecasts generally
state that the information contained therein has been obtained
from sources believed to be reliable, but there can be no
assurance as to the accuracy or completeness of included
information. We have not independently verified any of the data
from third-party sources nor have we ascertained the underlying
economic assumptions relied upon therein. While we are not aware
of any misstatements regarding the industry and market data
presented herein, the data involve risks and uncertainties and
are subject to change based on various factors.
AVAILABLE
INFORMATION
We make available free of charge on or through our Internet
website our annual reports on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K
and all amendments to those reports as soon as reasonably
practicable after such material is electronically filed with or
furnished to the Securities and Exchange
1
Commission, or the SEC. Our Internet address is
http://www.gen-probe.com.
The information contained in, or that can be accessed through,
our website is not part of this Annual Report nor is such
information incorporated by reference herein.
Corporate
Overview
Gen-Probe Incorporated (NASDAQ: GPRO) is a global leader in the
development, manufacture and marketing of rapid, accurate and
cost-effective molecular diagnostic products and services that
are used primarily to diagnose human diseases, screen donated
human blood, and ensure transplant compatibility. Our molecular
diagnostic products are designed to detect diseases more rapidly
and/or
accurately than older tests, and are among the fastest-growing
categories of the in vitro diagnostics, or IVD,
industry.
We market a broad portfolio of nucleic acid tests, or NATs, to
detect infectious microorganisms, including those causing
sexually transmitted diseases, or STDs, tuberculosis, strep
throat, and other infections. Our leading clinical diagnostics
products include our APTIMA family of assays that are used to
detect the common STDs chlamydia and gonorrhea.
In 2009 and 2010, we expanded our portfolio of products with
acquisitions focused on transplant-related and respiratory
diagnostics. Our transplant diagnostics business, which we
obtained as part of our acquisition of Tepnel Life Sciences plc,
or Tepnel, in April 2009, offers diagnostics to help determine
the compatibility between donors and recipients in tissue and
organ transplants. Our acquisition of Prodesse, Inc., or
Prodesse, in October 2009 added a portfolio of real-time
polymerase chain reaction, or real-time PCR, products for
detecting influenza and other infectious organisms. In addition,
in December 2010, we acquired GTI Diagnostics, a manufacturer of
certain of our transplant diagnostic products, in addition to
specialty coagulation and transfusion-related blood bank
products.
In blood screening, we developed and manufacture the PROCLEIX
assays, which are used to detect human immunodeficiency virus
(type 1), or HIV-1, the hepatitis C virus, or HCV, the
hepatitis B virus, or HBV, and the West Nile virus, or WNV, in
donated human blood. These blood screening products are marketed
worldwide by Novartis under Novartis trademarks.
Several of our current and future molecular tests can be
performed on our TIGRIS instrument, a fully automated,
high-throughput NAT system for diagnostics and blood screening.
We are building on the success of our TIGRIS instrument system
by developing and commercializing our next-generation PANTHER
instrument, which is designed to be a versatile, fully automated
NAT system for low- to mid-volume laboratories. The PANTHER
instrument was CE-marked and launched in Europe in the fourth
quarter of 2010.
Our development pipeline includes products to detect:
|
|
|
|
|
human papillomavirus, or HPV, which causes cervical cancer;
|
|
|
|
gene-based markers for prostate cancer;
|
|
|
|
Trichomonas, a common parasite that causes a highly prevalent
STD;
|
|
|
|
certain respiratory infections;
|
|
|
|
antigens and antibodies that are used to determine transplant
and transfusion compatibility; and
|
|
|
|
specialty coagulation products.
|
Company
History
Gen-Probe was founded in 1983, and was incorporated under the
laws of the state of Delaware in 1987. In September 2002, we
were spun off from Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., our former
indirect parent, as a separate, stand-alone company. Our common
stock began trading on The Nasdaq Global Select Market on
September 16, 2002. Our headquarters facility is located in
San Diego and we employ approximately 1,400 people.
2
Recent
Transactions
Acquisition
of Tepnel Life Sciences plc
In April 2009, we acquired Tepnel (now known as Gen-Probe Life
Sciences Ltd.), a United Kingdom-based international life
sciences products and services company, for approximately
$137.1 million (based on the then applicable GBP to USD
exchange rate). Our acquisition of Tepnel has provided us with
growth opportunities in transplant diagnostics, genetic testing
and pharmaceutical services, as well as accelerated our ongoing
strategic efforts to strengthen our marketing and sales,
distribution and manufacturing capabilities in Europe.
Spin-off
of Industrial Testing Assets to Roka Bioscience,
Inc.
In September 2009, we spun-off our industrial testing assets to
Roka Bioscience, Inc., or Roka, a newly formed private company.
In consideration for our contribution of assets in connection
with the transaction, we received shares of preferred stock
representing 19.9% of Rokas capital stock on a fully
diluted basis. As part of the spin-off transaction, our
industrial testing collaboration agreements with GE Water (a
division of GE Energy, a business unit of General Electric) and
Millipore Corporation were transferred to Roka.
Acquisition
of Prodesse, Inc.
In October 2009, we acquired Prodesse, a privately held
Wisconsin corporation, for approximately $60.0 million,
subject to a designated pre-closing operating income adjustment,
and up to an aggregate of $25.0 million in potential
additional cash payments based on the achievement of certain
specified performance measures. As a result of the failure to
achieve a specified milestone, the maximum amount of contingent
consideration we may be required to pay for our acquisition of
Prodesse has been reduced to $15.0 million, of which
$10.0 million was paid in July 2010. We do not currently
expect to make any further milestone payments related to our
acquisition of Prodesse. Our acquisition of Prodesse has
provided us with access to the respiratory and gastrointestinal
infectious disease markets, which we believe supports our
strategic focus on commercializing differentiated molecular
tests for infectious diseases.
Sale
of BioKits Food Safety Testing Business
In December 2009, we sold our BioKits food safety testing
business to Neogen Corporation. This business, which we acquired
as part of our acquisition of Tepnel earlier in 2009, includes
tests for food allergens, meat and fish speciation, and plant
genetics. We believe the divestiture of this business is
consistent with our strategic focus on human molecular
diagnostic opportunities.
Collaboration
with and Investment in Pacific Biosciences of California,
Inc.
In June 2010, we entered into a collaboration agreement with
Pacific Biosciences of California, Inc., or Pacific Biosciences,
regarding the research and development of instruments
integrating our sample preparation technologies and Pacific
Biosciences single-molecule deoxyribonucleic acid, or DNA,
sequencing technologies for use in clinical diagnostics. Subject
to customary termination rights, the initial term of the
collaboration will end on the earlier of December 15, 2012
or six months after Pacific Biosciences demonstrates the proof
of concept of its V2 single-molecule DNA sequencing
system. Concurrently with the execution of the collaboration
agreement, we also purchased $50.0 million of Pacific
Biosciences Series F preferred stock, as a
participant in Pacific Biosciences Series F preferred
stock round of financing that raised a total of approximately
$109.0 million. In October 2010, Pacific Biosciences
completed an initial public offering of its common stock. As a
result of the initial public offering, our preferred stock was
converted into common stock.
Acquisition
of GTI Diagnostics
In December 2010, we acquired Genetic Testing Institute, Inc., a
privately held Wisconsin corporation doing business as GTI
Diagnostics, for approximately $53.0 million on a net-cash
basis. Our acquisition of GTI Diagnostics has broadened and
strengthened our transplant diagnostics business, and has also
provided us access to new products in the specialty coagulation
and transfusion-related blood bank markets.
3
Strategy
We intend to increase our scale and expand our geographic reach,
both by investing in our existing businesses and by acquiring
new businesses that are consistent with our strategy. We intend
to compete in the womens health, infectious diseases,
blood screening and transplant diagnostics markets, and expand
into adjacent markets where our core strengths give us a
sustainable competitive advantage. We expect that our PANTHER
program will be central to our strategy of bringing superior
automation to our customers, and along with TIGRIS, will serve
as the core of our instrument platform strategy for the coming
years.
The focus of our womens health strategy will continue to
be our chlamydia and gonorrhea business, where we intend to
invest in technologies and products to maintain or expand our
market share. We also intend to commercialize our HPV screening
assay and related products, with the goal of becoming one of the
leaders in this market over time. In addition, we expect to
develop and commercialize niche assays that expand and
complement our product menus.
We have a portfolio of respiratory infectious disease products
as a result of our acquisition of Prodesse in October 2009, and
we intend to continue to develop products to serve the
infectious disease market. We also intend to pursue internal
development programs to establish a leadership position in the
virology market.
In blood screening, we partner with Novartis to ensure the
safety of the worldwide blood supply. We intend to continue to
work with Novartis to maintain the vitality of our blood
screening business by investing in areas that promise strong
returns on our investment, and by developing our PANTHER
instrument platform in the blood screening market.
Our transplant diagnostics business comprises our human
leukocyte antigen, or HLA, products and related assays. We
intend to continue to invest in our transplant diagnostics
business in order to improve our market positioning, broaden our
product offering and develop our technological capabilities.
We also intend to continue to expand into adjacent markets
within clinical diagnostics, beginning with genetic testing,
which includes prostate oncology and companion diagnostics, as
well as other markets where we believe we can establish a
competitive advantage. We believe that our collaboration with
Pacific Biosciences related to genetic sequencing could support
our efforts in this area over the longer term.
Competitive
Strengths
Assay
Development
We believe our core technologies and scientific expertise enable
us to develop diagnostic and blood screening assays with
superior performance over competing NAT products. We measure
performance in terms of sensitivity, specificity, speed of
results and ease of use. For example, independent investigators
have published several studies demonstrating that our APTIMA
Combo 2 assay for chlamydia and gonorrhea is more sensitive than
competing molecular tests. In addition, we believe we have
enhanced our ability to develop infectious disease assays based
on real-time PCR technology through our acquisition of Prodesse.
Instrument
Development and Automation
We believe we have the capability to develop instrument
platforms that offer superior automation. We have commercialized
what we believe to be the worlds first fully automated,
integrated, high-throughput, NAT instrument system, the TIGRIS
instrument. Launched in 2004, the TIGRIS instrument
significantly reduces labor costs and contamination risks in
high-volume diagnostic testing environments, and enables large
blood screening centers to individually test donors blood.
We are building on the success of TIGRIS by developing and
commercializing a new automated instrument platform, called the
PANTHER system, designed for low- to mid-volume customers, which
we believe will be a pillar in our future instrumentation
platform strategy. The PANTHER instrument was CE-marked and
launched in Europe in the fourth quarter of 2010 and we intend
to seek regulatory clearance for the PANTHER system in the
United States. We believe that the use of automated
instrumentation, such as our TIGRIS and PANTHER instruments,
will facilitate growth in both the clinical diagnostics and
blood screening portions of the NAT market.
4
Innovation
As of December 31, 2010, we had 318 full-time and
temporary employees in research and development. We believe that
compared to our peers, we invest a higher percentage of our
revenue in research and development, with expenses totaling
$111.1 million in 2010, $106.0 million in 2009 and
$101.1 million in 2008. Based on these investments, we had
more than 540 United States and foreign patents covering our
products and technologies as of December 31, 2010. We were
awarded a 2004 National Medal of Technology, the nations
highest honor for technological innovation, in recognition of
our pioneering work in developing NAT testing systems to
safeguard the nations blood supply.
Sales
and Service
As of December 31, 2010, our direct sales force consisted
of 65 employees and a 62-member technical field support
group who target customers in the United States, Canada and
certain countries in Europe. We believe these individuals
comprise one of the most knowledgeable and effective sales and
support organizations in our industry. Our sales representatives
have an average of approximately 13 years of overall sales
experience. We view our long-standing relationships with
laboratory customers and the value-added services that our sales
force and technical field specialist group offer, including
technical product assistance, customer support and new product
training, as central to our success in the United States
clinical diagnostics market, and we are looking to duplicate
this success as we expand our sales force in Europe. We
complement our sales force with leading international
distributors and the direct sales organizations of our
collaborative partners.
Quality
We are committed to quality in our products, operations and
people. Our products, design control and manufacturing processes
are regulated by numerous third parties, including the United
States Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, foreign
governments, independent standards auditors and customers. Our
team of 205 full-time and temporary employees in
regulatory, clinical and quality has successfully led us through
multiple quality and compliance inspections and audits. For
example, our blood screening manufacturing facility meets the
strict standards set by the FDAs Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research, or CBER, for the production of blood
screening products. We believe our expertise in regulatory and
quality assurance and our manufacturing facilities enable us to
efficiently and effectively design, manufacture and secure
approval for new products and technologies that meet the
standards set by governing bodies and our customers. We have
implemented modern quality systems and concepts throughout our
organization. Our regulatory and quality assurance departments
supervise our quality systems and are responsible for assuring
compliance with all applicable regulations, standards and
internal policies. Our senior management team is actively
involved in setting quality policies, managing regulatory
matters and monitoring external quality performance.
Markets
The NAT market developed in response to a need for more rapid,
sensitive and specific diagnostic tests for the detection of
infectious microorganisms than were previously available using
traditional laboratory methods, such as culture and
immunoassays. Culture methods require the growth of a
microorganism in a controlled medium and can take several days
or longer to yield a definitive diagnostic result. By contrast,
nucleic acid probes, which specifically bind to nucleic acid
sequences that are known to be unique to the target organisms,
can generally deliver an accurate diagnostic result in just
hours. The greater sensitivity and increased specificity of NATs
relative to immunoassays allows for the detection of the
presence of a lower concentration of the target organism and
helps clinicians distinguish between harmful and benign
microorganisms, even when the organisms are closely related,
reducing the potential for false negative and
false positive results. For example, the greater
sensitivity of amplified NAT allows for the rapid, direct
detection of a target organism like Chlamydia trachomatis
in urine, even when it is present in low concentrations.
We are focused on NAT market opportunities in womens
health, infectious diseases, blood screening and transplant
diagnostics. We are also expanding into adjacent areas where we
believe our capabilities give us a sustainable competitive
advantage, beginning with genetic testing, which includes
prostate oncology and
5
companion diagnostics. We believe that our collaboration with
Pacific Biosciences related to genetic sequencing could support
our efforts in this area over the longer term. In addition, as a
result of our acquisition of Tepnel, we also offer services for
the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and healthcare industries
through our research products and services business, which
includes nucleic acid purification and analysis services, as
well as the sale of monoclonal antibodies.
Womens
Health
Chlamydia and Gonorrhea. NAT assays are
currently used to detect the microorganisms causing various
STDs, including chlamydia and gonorrhea, the two most common
bacterial STDs. Chlamydia, the common name for the bacterium
Chlamydia trachomatis, causes the most prevalent
bacterial sexually transmitted infection in the United States,
with an estimated 2.8 million new cases in the United
States each year according to the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, or CDC. The clinical consequences of undiagnosed
and untreated chlamydia infections include pelvic inflammatory
disease, ectopic pregnancy and infertility.
Gonorrhea, the disease caused by the bacterium Neisseria
gonorrhoeae, is the second most frequently reported
bacterial STD in the United States, according to the CDC. The
CDC estimates that each year approximately 700,000 people
in the United States contract gonorrhea. Untreated gonorrhea is
also a major cause of pelvic inflammatory disease, which may
lead to infertility or abnormal pregnancies. In addition, recent
data suggest that gonorrhea facilitates HIV transmission.
Chlamydia and gonorrhea infections frequently co-exist,
complicating the clinical differential diagnosis. Because
chlamydia and gonorrhea infections are often asymptomatic,
screening programs are important in high-risk populations, such
as sexually active men and women between the ages of 15 and 25.
According to internal market research, our products represented
approximately 60% of the total chlamydia and gonorrhea tests
sold in the United States in 2010.
Human papillomavirus (HPV). HPV is a group of
viruses with more than 100
sub-types,
14 of which have been categorized as high risk for the
development of cervical cancer. While most women will be
infected with HPV at some point in their lives, the majority of
these infections are transient and resolve without any clinical
symptoms or consequences. However, a small number of HPV
infections progress and result in disease ranging from genital
warts to cervical cancer. Since most HPV infections do not
result in cancer, there is a need for a more specific test to
identify women at greater risk of developing that disease.
The most common test used for cervical cancer screening in the
United States is the Pap test. Since the mid-1950s, screening
with the Pap test has dramatically reduced the number of deaths
from cervical cancer. Even so, the American Cancer Society
estimates that there will be more than 12,000 new cases of
invasive cervical cancer in 2010, and more than 4,000 deaths
from the disease.
Despite the success of Pap testing in reducing mortality from
cervical cancer in the United States, it suffers from
limitations. One such limitation is poor sensitivity of
individual Pap smears, which means the test may miss cancers or
precancerous changes. As a result, regular and repeated Pap
testing is required to effectively detect a high proportion of
cervical cancers. Another limitation is that approximately
2 million of the 55 million Pap tests performed
annually in the United States have equivocal results, which are
known as ASC-US. These women are often subjected to additional
invasive tests, including biopsies, most of which prove negative.
In May 2008, we launched our APTIMA HPV assay in Europe. The
assay has been CE-marked for use on the TIGRIS system and on our
semi-automated Direct Tube Sampling, or DTS, system. The assay
is an amplified NAT that is designed to detect 14
sub-types of
high-risk HPV that are associated with cervical cancer. More
specifically, the assay is designed to detect certain messenger
ribonucleic acids, or mRNAs, that are made in greater amounts
when HPV infections progress toward cervical cancer. We believe
that targeting these mRNAs may more accurately identify women at
higher risk of having, or developing, cervical cancer than
competing assays that target HPV DNA. In the fourth quarter of
2010, we submitted a premarket approval application, or PMA, to
the FDA for our investigational APTIMA HPV assay on the TIGRIS
system.
6
Trichomonas vaginalis. Trichomonas is a
sexually transmitted parasite that can cause vaginitis,
urethritis, premature membrane rupture in pregnancy, and make
women more susceptible to infection with HIV-1, the virus that
causes acquired immune deficiency syndrome, or AIDS. The CDC
estimates that there are 7.4 million cases of Trichomonas
infection annually in the United States, making it even more
prevalent than chlamydia and gonorrhea, the most common
bacterial sexually transmitted diseases. Screening for
Trichomonas is limited today due in part to the shortfalls of
current testing techniques. Most testing currently is done via
culture methods, which are slow and less sensitive than
molecular tests, or wet mount, which requires the
microscopic examination of a sample shortly after it is
collected.
In June 2010, our APTIMA Trichomonas vaginalis assay was
CE-marked for use on the TIGRIS system, which enables the sale
of the CE-marked assay in Europe. In addition, in the third
quarter of 2010, we submitted a 510(k) application to the FDA
for clearance of our Trichomonas assay on the TIGRIS system in
the United States.
Group B Streptococcus. Group B Streptococcus,
or GBS, represents a major infectious cause of illness and death
in newborns in the United States and can cause cerebral palsy,
visual impairment, permanent brain damage and learning
disabilities. Our AccuProbe Group B Streptococcus Culture ID
Test offers a rapid, non-subjective method for the
identification of GBS based on the detection of specific
ribosomal ribonucleic acid, or RNA, sequences.
Infectious
Diseases
Influenza and Other Respiratory Infections. In
October 2009, we added to our existing menu of infectious
disease products by acquiring Prodesse, which offers a number of
products in the infectious disease market, with current products
principally focused on respiratory infections.
Influenza (flu) viruses are a common cause of serious
respiratory infections. Flu refers to illnesses caused by a
number of different influenza viruses. Flu can cause a range of
symptoms from mild to severe, and in some cases the infection
can lead to death. Most healthy people recover from the flu
without problems, but certain people are at high risk for
serious complications. Flu symptoms may include fever, coughing,
sore throat, runny or stuffy nose, headaches, body aches, chills
and fatigue. In recent years, several strains of flu, including
seasonal flu and the novel H1N1 (swine) flu, have circulated in
the United States. Like seasonal flu, illness in people with
swine flu can vary from mild to severe. Annual outbreaks of the
seasonal flu usually occur during the late fall through early
spring.
We market and sell ProFlu+, a real-time PCR assay designed to
detect influenza A and B and respiratory syncytial virus, or
RSV, and ProFAST+, a real-time PCR assay designed to detect and
differentiate three types of influenza A: seasonal H1, novel
2009 H1N1, and seasonal H3, under our Prodesse product line. The
ProFAST+ assay was cleared for marketing in the United States by
the FDA in July 2010. We had previously sold an earlier version
of this assay under the name ProFlu-ST pursuant to an Emergency
Use Authorization granted by the FDA because of the swine flu
pandemic. Our Prodesse product line also includes ProGastro Cd,
a real-time PCR assay for the qualitative detection of toxigenic
C. difficile, as well as other tests for respiratory infections.
Tuberculosis. Tuberculosis, or TB, the disease
caused by the microorganism Mycobacterium tuberculosis,
remains one of the deadliest diseases in the world. Our
amplified Mycobacterium Tuberculosis Direct, or MTD, test has
sensitivity similar to a culture test but can detect the TB
pathogen within a few hours. In addition, our MTD test is the
only approved assay in the United States with a smear negative
claim.
Group A Streptococcus. Group A Streptococcus,
or GAS, is the cause of strep throat, which if left
untreated may cause serious complications, such as rheumatic
fever and rheumatic heart disease. Our Group A Streptococcus
Direct Test, or GASDirect assay, is a rapid NAT assay for the
direct detection of Streptococcus pyogenes in one hour
from a throat swab.
Virology. NAT assays can be used to detect
viral DNA or RNA in a patient sample. These tests can be
qualitative, meaning that the tests simply provide a
yes-no answer for the presence or absence of the
virus, or quantitative, meaning that the test determines the
quantity of virus in the patient sample.
Today, most NAT testing in the virology field is done for HIV
and HCV. HIV is the virus responsible for AIDS. Individuals with
AIDS show progressive deterioration of their immune systems and
become increasingly
7
susceptible to various diseases, including many that rarely pose
a threat to healthy individuals. HCV is a blood-borne pathogen
posing one of the greatest health threats in developing
countries. According to the World Health Organization, or WHO,
approximately 80% of newly infected patients progress to develop
chronic infection, which can lead to both cirrhosis and liver
cancer. The WHO reports that approximately 170 million
people are infected worldwide with HCV. According to the
National Cancer Institute, an estimated 4.1 million people
in the United States have been infected with HCV, of whom
3.2 million are chronically infected according to the CDC.
Most people with chronic HCV infection are asymptomatic.
We have developed and market qualitative NATs for HIV-1 and HCV
in the United States. In addition, we sell analyte specific
reagents, or ASRs, for quantitative HCV testing in the United
States through our collaboration with Siemens Healthcare
Diagnostics, Inc., or Siemens. We are currently investigating
opportunities to broaden our virology business, and have begun
early development work on a quantitative HIV assay that would be
designed to run on our PANTHER instrument.
Blood
Screening
According to the WHO, each year more than 80 million units
of blood are donated worldwide. Before being used for
transfusion, blood must be screened to ensure that it does not
contain infectious agents such as viruses. The most commonly
screened viruses are HIV, HCV, WNV and HBV.
Prior to the introduction of NAT for blood screening, blood
screening centers primarily used immunoassays to determine the
presence of blood-borne pathogens through the detection of
virus-specific antibodies and viral antigens. These tests either
directly detect the viral antigens or detect antibodies formed
by the body in response to the virus. However, this immune
response may take some time following initial infection.
Consequently, if the donor has not developed detectable
antibodies or detectable amounts of viral antigens as of the
time of the donation, recipients of that blood may be
unwittingly exposed to serious disease. NAT technology can
detect minute amounts of virus soon after infection by
amplifying the nucleic acid material of the viruses themselves,
rather than requiring the development of detectable levels of
antibodies or viral antigens.
We believe that our products are used to screen over 80% of the
United States donated blood supply for HIV-1, HCV and WNV.
Transplant
Diagnostics
HLA testing, also known as HLA typing or tissue typing,
identifies antigens on white blood cells that determine tissue
compatibility for organ transplantation (that is,
histocompatibility testing). HLA typing, along with blood type
grouping, is used to provide evidence of tissue compatibility.
The HLA antigens expressed on the surface of the lymphocytes of
the recipient are matched against those from various donors.
Human leukocyte antigen typing is performed for kidney, bone
marrow, liver, pancreas, and heart transplants. The probability
that a transplant will be successful increases with the number
of identical HLA antigens. Graft rejection occurs when the
immune cells (T-lymphocytes) of the recipient recognize specific
HLA antigens on the donors organ as foreign. The
T-lymphocytes initiate a cellular immune response that results
in graft rejection. Alternatively, T-lymphocytes present in the
grafted tissue may recognize the host tissues as foreign and
produce a cell-mediated immune response against the recipient.
This is called graft versus host disease, or GVHD, and it can
lead to life-threatening systemic damage in the recipient. HLA
testing is performed to reduce the probability of both rejection
and GVHD, and is also used in the ongoing management of
transplant recipients.
The HLA testing products offered by Tepnel and GTI Diagnostics
enable us to diversify into the transplant typing market. Tepnel
sells xMAP multiplex assays in the field of transplant
diagnostics under its development and supply agreement with
Luminex. GTI Diagnostics develops and manufactures the HLA
antibody detection products which we sell under our LIFECODES
brand. GTI Diagnostics also commercializes a number of other
HLA-related testing products, including serological typing
trays, enzyme immunoassays, and a range of molecular typing
products for donor-recipient matching and patient monitoring.
8
Genetic
Testing
Prostate Oncology. The field of NAT-based
cancer diagnostics is an emerging market as new markers that
correlate to the presence of cancer continue to be discovered.
According to the Prostate Cancer Foundation, prostate cancer is
the most common non-skin cancer in the United States, affecting
an estimated one in six men. We acquired exclusive worldwide
diagnostic rights to the PCA3 gene from DiagnoCure, Inc., or
DiagnoCure, in November 2003. In addition, in April 2006, we
entered into a license agreement with the University of Michigan
for exclusive worldwide rights to develop diagnostic tests for
genetic translocations that have been shown in preliminary
studies to be highly specific for prostate cancer tissue.
In November 2006, we launched our CE-marked PROGENSA PCA3 assay,
a prostate cancer specific molecular diagnostic test, in Europe.
Our ASRs for detection of the PCA3 gene are also available in
the United States. ASRs comprise a category of individual
reagents utilized by clinical laboratories to develop and
validate their own diagnostic tests.
In August 2009, we began a clinical trial intended to secure
U.S. regulatory approval of our PROGENSA PCA3 assay for use
on our semi-automated DTS instrument systems. We submitted a PMA
to the FDA for approval of our PROGENSA PCA3 assay in the third
quarter of 2010.
Companion Diagnostics. We believe markets will
continue to develop for new applications of NAT technology in
other clinical fields. We expect that NAT technology will be
used in new applications such as genetic predisposition testing
and pharmacogenomics, which involves the study of the
relationship between nucleic acid sequence variations in an
individuals genome and the individuals response to a
particular drug. We believe the emergence of pharmacogenomics
and individually targeted therapeutics will create opportunities
for diagnostic companies to develop tests to detect genetic
variations that affect responses to drug therapies.
Genetic testing to identify individuals at risk of certain
diseases and pathological syndromes is emerging as an additional
market for NAT technology. Through our acquisition of Tepnel, we
gained access to genetic tests that are CE-marked in Europe for
cystic fibrosis, Down Syndrome, and familial
hypercholesterolemia, among other diseases. In addition, in
November 2010 we launched our ELUCIGENE KRAS.BRAF assay, which
provides valuable information regarding mutation status that can
help clinicians determine the most appropriate treatment course
for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
Key
Product Technologies
APTIMA
Family of Technologies
Our APTIMA products integrate our patented
transcription-mediated amplification, or TMA, technology, target
capture technology, and our patented hybridization protection
assay, or HPA, and dual kinetic assay, or DKA, technologies, to
produce highly refined amplification assays that increase assay
performance, reduce laboratory costs and improve laboratory
efficiency. Each of these technologies is described in greater
detail below.
|
|
|
|
|
Target Capture/Nucleic Acid Extraction
Technology. Detection of target organisms that
are present in small numbers in a large-volume clinical sample
requires that target organisms be concentrated to a detectable
level. One way to accomplish this is to isolate the particular
nucleic acid of interest by binding it to a solid support. This
support, with the target bound to it, can then be separated from
the original sample. We refer to such techniques as target
capture. We have developed target capture techniques to
immobilize nucleic acids on magnetic beads by the use of a
capture probe that attaches to the bead and to the
target nucleic acid. We use a magnetic separation device to
concentrate the target by drawing the magnetic beads to the
sides of the sample tube, while the remainder of the sample is
washed away and removed. When used in conjunction with our
patented amplification methods, target capture techniques
concentrate the nucleic acid target(s) and also remove materials
in the sample that might otherwise interfere with amplification.
|
|
|
|
Transcription-Mediated Amplification (TMA)
Technology. The goal of amplification
technologies is to produce millions of copies of the target
nucleic acid sequences that are present in samples in small
numbers. These copies can then be detected using DNA probes.
Amplification technologies can yield results in only a few hours
versus the several days or weeks required for traditional
culture methods. Our patented TMA
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
technology is designed to overcome problems faced by other
target amplification methods. TMA is a transcription-based
amplification system that uses two different enzymes to drive
the process. The first enzyme is a reverse transcriptase that
creates a double-stranded DNA copy from an RNA or DNA template.
The second enzyme, an RNA polymerase, makes thousands of copies
of the complementary RNA sequence, known as the RNA
amplicon, from the double-stranded DNA template. Each RNA
amplicon serves as a new target for the reverse transcriptase
and the process repeats automatically, resulting in an
exponential amplification of the original target that can
produce over a billion copies of amplicon in less than 30
minutes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hybridization Protection Assay (HPA) and Dual Kinetic Assay
(DKA) Technologies. With our patented HPA
technology, we have simplified testing, further increased test
sensitivity and specificity, and increased convenience. In the
HPA process, the acridinium ester, or AE, molecule is protected
within the double-stranded helix that is formed when the probe
binds to its specific target. Prior to activating the AE
molecule, known as lighting off, a chemical is added
that destroys the AE molecule on any unhybridized probes,
leaving the label on the hybridized probes largely unaffected.
When the light off or detection reagent is added to
the specimen, only the label attached to the hybridized probe is
left to produce a signal indicating that the target
organisms DNA or RNA is present. All of these steps occur
in a single tube and without any wash steps, which were required
as part of conventional probe tests. Our DKA technology uses two
types of AE molecules one that flashes
and another one that glows. By using DKA, we have
created NAT assays that can detect two separate targets
simultaneously.
|
Other
Product Technologies
Our recent acquisitions have expanded our portfolio to include
products in the respiratory disease and HLA fields, among
others, which are based on certain third party technologies,
including Roches real-time PCR technology, and
Luminexs xMAP technology, each of which is described below.
|
|
|
|
|
Real-Time Polymerase Chain Reaction Technology (real-time
PCR). Real-time PCR is a laboratory technique
based on PCR, which is used to amplify and simultaneously
quantify a targeted nucleic acid (DNA or RNA) molecule.
Real-time PCR enables both detection and quantification of one
or more specific sequences in a nucleic acid sample. Real-time
PCR follows the general principle of PCR; its key feature is
that the amplified nucleic acid is detected as the reaction
progresses in real time, rather than at the end of the
amplification reaction.
|
|
|
|
Luminex xMAP Technology. Luminexs xMAP
technology combines existing biological testing techniques with
advanced digital signal processing and proprietary software.
With the technology, discrete bioassays are performed on the
surface of color-coded microspheres. These microspheres are read
in a compact analyzer that utilizes lasers and high-speed
digital signal processing to simultaneously identify the
bioassay and measure the individual assay results. To perform a
bioassay using xMAP technology, a researcher attaches
biochemicals, or reagents, to one or more sets of color-coded
microspheres, which are then mixed with an extracted test
sample. This mixture is injected into an xMAP analyzer, where
the microspheres pass single-file in a fluid stream through two
laser beams. The first laser excites the internal dyes that are
used to identify the color of the microsphere and the test being
performed on the surface of the microsphere. The second laser
excites a fluorescent dye captured on the surface of the
microsphere that is used to quantify the result of the bioassay
taking place. Luminexs proprietary optics, digital signal
processors and software record the fluorescent signature of each
microsphere and compare the results to the known identity of
that color-coded microsphere set. The results are analyzed and
displayed in real-time with data stored on the computer database
for reference, evaluation and analysis.
|
10
Key
Products
In the tables below we identify some of the key products we
offer in the various markets we currently serve. As described in
more detail in the Risk Factors section included in
Item 1A of this Annual Report, for products that have not
received regulatory clearance in one or more jurisdictions,
there can be no assurance that such product(s) will be approved
for sale in the applicable jurisdiction(s).
Womens
Health
We have established a market-leading position with respect to
assays for the detection of chlamydia and gonorrhea, and have
obtained several FDA approvals to compete in this market
category.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Line
|
|
|
Description
|
|
|
Availability
|
APTIMA Combo 2 assay
|
|
|
Uses APTIMA technology to simultaneously detect chlamydia and
gonorrhea.
|
|
|
Marketed globally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APTIMA CT, APTIMA GC assays
|
|
|
Standalone NATs that use APTIMA technology to detect chlamydia
and gonorrhea.
|
|
|
Marketed globally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PACE family of assays
|
|
|
Non-amplified NATs to detect chlamydia and gonorrhea.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by distributors outside the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APTIMA Trichomonas assay
|
|
|
Uses APTIMA technology to detect trichomonas
|
|
|
Marketed in Europe; 510(k) application filed in the third
quarter of 2010 to obtain FDA clearance for sale within the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APTIMA Trichomonas ASRs
|
|
|
Analyte specific reagents that use APTIMA technology to enable
laboratories qualified under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement
Amendments, or CLIA, to detect Trichomonas.
|
|
|
ASRs available in the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APTIMA HPV assay
|
|
|
Uses APTIMA technology to detect 14 sub-types of high-risk HPV
associated with cervical cancer.
|
|
|
Marketed in Europe; PMA filed in the fourth quarter of 2010 to
obtain FDA regulatory approval for sale within the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AccuProbe Group B Streptococcus (GBS) assay
|
|
|
Non-amplified NAT to detect GBS from culture.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by distributors outside the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
Infectious
Diseases
Our acquisition of Prodesse in October 2009 added assays for
certain respiratory and gastrointestinal diseases to our menu of
products in this field, which now includes the products
described in the table below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Line
|
|
|
Description
|
|
|
Availability
|
ProFlu+
|
|
|
Uses real-time PCR to detect influenza A, B and Respiratory
syncytial virus, or RSV.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by distributors outside the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ProFAST+
|
|
|
Uses real-time PCR to detect and differentiate three types of
influenza A: seasonal H1, novel 2009 H1N1, and seasonal H3.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by distributors outside the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ProGastro Cd
|
|
|
Uses real-time PCR to detect toxigenic strains of Clostridium
difficile.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by distributors outside the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AMPLIFIED MTD
|
|
|
Uses TMA to detect Mycobacterium tuberculosis.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by distributors outside the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GAS Direct
|
|
|
Non-amplified NAT to detect GAS directly from a throat swab.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by distributors outside the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APTIMA HIV-1 assay
|
|
|
Uses APTIMA technology to qualitatively detect RNA from HIV-1,
the virus that causes AIDS.
|
|
|
Marketed in the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
APTIMA HCV assay
|
|
|
Uses APTIMA technology to qualitatively detect RNA from the
hepatitis C virus.
|
|
|
Marketed globally (co-marketed with Siemens).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASRs for quantitative HCV testing
|
|
|
Analyte specific reagents used by laboratories qualified under
CLIA to quantify HCV viral load.
|
|
|
Marketed by Siemens in the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
Blood
Screening
In 1996, the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute of the
National Institutes of Health, or NIH, selected us to develop
reagents and instrumentation for the blood donor screening
market based on our core technologies. We completed our
development of the NAT assays for HIV-1 and HCV for blood
screening contemplated by the NIH contract in February 2002
incorporating our core technologies of TMA, target capture and
DKA. The principal blood screening products that we have
developed are set forth below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Line
|
|
|
Description
|
|
|
Availability
|
Procleix HIV-1/HCV assay
|
|
|
Amplified NAT to simultaneously detect HIV-1 and HCV in donated
blood, plasma, organs and tissues.
|
|
|
Marketed globally by Novartis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Procleix Ultrio assay
|
|
|
Amplified NAT to simultaneously detect HIV-1, HCV and HBV in
donated blood, plasma, organs and tissues.
|
|
|
Marketed globally by Novartis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Procleix Ultrio Plus assay
|
|
|
Amplified NAT to simultaneously detect HIV-1, HCV and HBV in
donated blood, plasma, organs and tissues.
|
|
|
Marketed outside the U.S. by Novartis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Procleix WNV assay
|
|
|
Amplified NAT to detect West Nile Virus in donated blood,
plasma, organs and tissues.
|
|
|
Marketed globally by Novartis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transplant
Diagnostics
As a result of our acquisitions of Tepnel in April 2009 and GTI
Diagnostics in December 2010, we now offer certain products in
the transplant diagnostics, specialty coagulation and
transfusion-related blood bank markets, including the products
described in the table below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Line
|
|
|
Description
|
|
|
Availability
|
LIFECODES HLA DNA typing kits
|
|
|
Uses the multiplex Luminex xMAP technology and sequence-specific
oligonucleotide, or SSO, methodology to determine the HLA type
of transplant patients.
|
|
|
Marketed globally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIFECODES antibody kits
|
|
|
Uses the multiplex Luminex xMAP platform to screen and identify
HLA antibodies present in transplant patients.
|
|
|
Marketed globally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PF4 Enhanced ELISA
|
|
|
An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, or ELISA, for the
detection of PF4 heparin-dependent antibodies.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by distributors in certain markets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pak family of
products
|
|
|
ELISA products designed for platelet antibody screening and
detection.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by distributors in certain markets.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13
Instrumentation
We have developed and continue to develop instrumentation and
software designed specifically for performing our NAT assays. We
also provide technical support and instrument service to
maintain these systems in the field. By placing our proprietary
instrumentation in laboratories and hospitals, we can establish
a platform for future sales of our assays. We also sell
instruments to Novartis for sale in the blood screening market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Line
|
|
|
Description
|
|
|
Availability
|
TIGRIS
|
|
|
Integrated, fully automated testing instrument for high-volume
laboratories. Approved to run APTIMA Combo 2, APTIMA CT and
APTIMA GC, as well as PROCLEIX ULTRIO and PROCLEIX WNV assays.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by Novartis in the blood screening
market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DTS (Direct Tube Sampling) instrument systems
|
|
|
Semi-automated instruments that include the DTS 400, 800 and
1600 instruments. Approved to run a number of infectious disease
and blood screening assays. In blood screening, also known as
the PROCLEIX system, or eSAS.
|
|
|
Marketed globally, including by distributors outside the U.S.
and by Novartis in the blood screening market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PANTHER
|
|
|
Integrated, fully automated testing instrument for low- to
mid-volume laboratories.
|
|
|
Marketed in Europe; not currently available for sale in the U.S.
or in the blood screening market.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Genetic
Testing
In November 2006, we CE-marked our PROGENSA PCA3 assay, allowing
it to be marketed in Europe. This gene-based test is designed to
detect the over-expression of PCA3 mRNA in urine. Studies have
shown that, in greater than 90 percent of prostate cancer
cases, PCA3 is extremely over-expressed (65-fold on average) in
prostate cancer cells compared to normal cells, indicating that
PCA3 may be a useful biomarker for prostate cancer. We filed a
PMA for our PROGENSA PCA3 assay on the DTS system with the FDA
in the third quarter of 2010 and also plan to modify our
existing PCA3 assay for use with our PANTHER instrument system
in the future.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product Line
|
|
|
Description
|
|
|
Availability
|
PROGENSA PCA3
|
|
|
Uses APTIMA technology to detect the PCA3 gene, which is
over-expressed by cancerous prostate tissue.
|
|
|
Marketed outside the U.S., including by distributor in Japan;
PMA filed in the third quarter of 2010 to obtain FDA regulatory
approval for sale within the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PCA3 ASRs
|
|
|
Analyte specific reagents used by laboratories qualified under
CLIA to detect the PCA3 gene, which is over-expressed by
cancerous prostate tissue.
|
|
|
ASRs available in the U.S.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14
Customers
The primary customers for our clinical diagnostic products
include large reference laboratories, public health institutions
and hospitals. Our blood screening products are marketed and
distributed worldwide by Novartis under Novartis
trademarks. Our blood screening collaboration with Novartis
accounted for 37% of our total revenues in 2010 and 40% of our
total revenues in 2009. Our blood screening collaboration with
Novartis is largely dependent on three large customers in the
United States, The American Red Cross, Americas Blood
Centers and Creative Testing Solutions, but we do not receive
any revenues directly from these entities. Novartis was our only
customer that accounted for greater than 10% of our total
revenues in 2010.
Marketing
Strategy
The focus of our marketing strategy is to solidify awareness of
the superiority of our technology, illustrate the cost
effectiveness of this technology and continue to differentiate
our products from those of our competitors. We target our
marketing efforts to various levels of laboratory and hospital
management through research publications, print advertisements,
conferences and the Internet. We attend various national and
regional industry conferences throughout the year. Our web site
is used to educate existing and potential customers about our
assays and contains our entire directory of products, on-line
technical materials and links to related medical sites.
Sales
Strategy
We market our products for the clinical diagnostics market to
laboratories in the United States, Canada and certain countries
in Europe through our direct sales force. In other countries, we
rely on distributors for our clinical diagnostic products. As of
December 31, 2010, our direct sales force consisted of a
staff of 65 sales employees and a staff of 62 technical field
support employees who support our sales efforts. Sales
representatives principally focus on large accounts, including
reference laboratories, public health institutions and hospitals
throughout North America and certain European countries.
Our sales representatives are able to recommend the appropriate
business solution to meet the needs of our customers by
presenting multiple NAT technology and instrumentation options.
Sales representatives are trained to find new product
opportunities, offer diagnostic solutions to address unmet
customer needs, and provide comprehensive after-sale product
support. In addition, our field technical support group provides
training and ongoing technical support for all of our NAT
products.
Distributors
We have an agreement with bioMérieux S.A., or
bioMérieux, for distribution of certain of our microbial
non-viral diagnostic products in Europe and various countries in
Asia (other than Japan), Australia, South America and Mexico. We
have an agreement for distribution of our microbial non-viral
diagnostic products in Japan with Fujirebio, Inc., or Fujirebio.
In other countries, we utilize independent distributors with
experience and expertise in clinical diagnostic products.
The blood screening products we manufacture under our
collaboration agreement with Novartis are marketed and
distributed solely by Novartis under Novartis trademarks.
Under our collaboration agreement with Siemens, we and Siemens
market our qualitative assays for HCV and Siemens distributes
ASRs for the quantitative detection of the amount of HCV present
in a sample.
Key
Collaborations and Agreements
Co-Exclusive
License from Stanford University
In August 1988, we obtained a license from Stanford University
granting us rights under specified patent applications covering
certain nucleic acid amplification methods related to TMA. This
license was amended in April 1997. Under the amended license
agreement, we are the co-exclusive worldwide licensee of the
Stanford amplification technology, with Organon Teknika as the
only other permitted Stanford licensee. We paid a license fee
and are obligated to make royalty payments to Stanford based on
net sales of products incorporating the licensed technology,
subject to a minimum annual royalty payment. From inception
through December 31, 2010, we incurred a total of
$18.1 million in expenses under this agreement, including
$3.4 million in expenses during 2010.
15
Our obligation to make royalty payments under this agreement
terminates when the patents constituting the Stanford
amplification technology expire, which is expected to occur in
July 2017. This agreement may be terminated by Stanford upon a
material breach of the agreement by us that is not cured
following 60 days written notice.
Womens
Health
Supply and Purchase Agreement with Roche. In
February 2005, we entered into a supply and purchase agreement
with F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd. and its affiliate Roche
Molecular Systems, Inc., which we refer to collectively as
Roche. Under this agreement, Roche agreed to manufacture and
supply us with oligonucleotides for HPV, which we use in our
molecular diagnostic assays. Pursuant to the agreement, we paid
Roche manufacturing access fees of $20.0 million in May
2005 and $10.0 million in May 2008, upon the first
commercial sale of our CE-marked APTIMA HPV assay in Europe. We
also agreed to pay Roche transfer fees for the HPV
oligonucleotides we purchase. The agreement terminates upon the
expiration of Roches patent rights relevant to the
agreement and may be terminated earlier in certain other limited
circumstances.
In December 2006, Digene Corporation, or Digene, filed a demand
for binding arbitration against Roche with the International
Centre for Dispute Resolution, or ICDR, of the American
Arbitration Association that asserted, among other things, that
Roche materially breached a cross-license agreement between
Roche and Digene by granting us an improper sublicense and
sought a determination that the supply and purchase agreement
was null and void. In July 2007, the ICDR arbitrators granted
our petition to join the arbitration. In April 2009, following
the arbitration hearing, a three-member arbitration panel from
the ICDR issued an interim award rejecting all claims asserted
by Digene (now Qiagen Gaithersburg, Inc.). In August 2009, the
arbitrators issued their final arbitration award, which
confirmed the interim award and also granted our motion to
recover attorneys fees and costs from Digene in the amount
of approximately $2.9 million. We filed a petition to
confirm the arbitration award in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of New York and Digene filed a
petition to vacate or modify the award. In August 2010, the
court confirmed the arbitration award and we received the
$2.9 million from Digene, which was recorded as an offset
to general and administrative expense.
Infectious
Diseases
Agreement with Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics, Inc. (formerly
Bayer Corporation). We supply our TMA assay for
the qualitative detection of HCV to Siemens pursuant to a
collaboration agreement. We also supply Siemens with ASRs for
the quantitative detection of HCV. Under the terms of the
agreement, Siemens pays us a combination of transfer prices and
royalties on sales of the HCV assays and reagents. We recognized
$1.3 million in revenue during 2010 under our collaboration
agreement with Siemens.
Blood
Screening
Agreement with Novartis (formerly Chiron
Corporation). The development, manufacture,
marketing and sale of our blood screening products is governed
by the terms of our collaboration agreement with Novartis, which
was originally executed in 1998 and subsequently amended on
numerous occasions. In July 2009, we entered into an amended and
restated collaboration agreement with Novartis, which sets forth
the current terms of the parties blood screening
collaboration. The term of the collaboration agreement runs
through June 30, 2025, unless terminated earlier pursuant
to its terms under certain specified conditions. Under the
collaboration agreement, we manufacture blood screening
products, while Novartis is responsible for marketing, sales and
service of those products, which Novartis sells under its
trademarks.
Starting in 2009, we were entitled to recover 50% of our
manufacturing costs incurred in connection with the
collaboration and will receive a percentage of the blood
screening assay revenue generated under the collaboration. Our
share of revenue from any assay that includes a test for HCV is
as follows: 2009, 44%;
2010-2011,
46%;
2012-2013,
47%; 2014, 48%; and 2015 through the remainder of the term of
the collaboration, 50%. Our share of blood screening assay
revenue from any assay that does not test for HCV remains at
50%. Novartis has also reduced the amount of time between
product sales and payment of our share of blood screening assay
revenue from 45 days to 30 days.
16
Novartis has also agreed to provide certain funding to customize
our PANTHER instrument for use in the blood screening market and
to pay us a milestone payment upon the earlier of certain
regulatory approvals or the first commercial sale of the PANTHER
instrument for use in the blood screening field. The parties
will share equally in any profit attributable to Novartis
sale or lease of PANTHER instruments under the collaboration.
From inception through December 31, 2010, we recognized a
total of $1.5 billion in revenue under our collaboration
with Novartis and have recorded $2.3 million in deferred
license revenues as of December 31, 2010.
Genetic
Testing
Exclusive License with DiagnoCure. In November
2003, we entered into a license and collaboration agreement with
DiagnoCure under which we agreed to develop in collaboration
with DiagnoCure, and we agreed to market, a test to detect a new
gene marker for prostate cancer. The diagnostic test is directed
at the PCA3 gene that has been shown by studies to be over
expressed in malignant prostate tissue. Under the terms of the
agreement, we paid DiagnoCure an upfront fee as well as certain
additional fees and contract development payments. We received
exclusive worldwide distribution rights under the agreement to
any products developed by the parties under the agreement for
the diagnosis of prostate cancer, and agreed to pay DiagnoCure
royalties on any such products of 8% on cumulative net product
sales of up to $50.0 million, and royalties of 16% on
cumulative net sales above $50.0 million. We commenced
paying these royalties in 2006. Unless terminated earlier
pursuant to specified terms, the agreement expires, on a
country-by-country
basis, on the expiration of our obligation to pay royalties to
DiagnoCure, which obligation remains in effect as long as the
licensed products are covered by a valid claim of the licensed
patent rights.
In April 2009, we further amended our license and collaboration
agreement with DiagnoCure. Pursuant to this amendment, our
exclusive license in the United States with respect to the
licensed PCA3 marker will be converted into a co-exclusive
license (with DiagnoCure) in the United States under certain
conditions, including our failure to timely file an application
with the FDA for regulatory approval of a PCA3 assay in the
United States. In addition, we agreed to use commercially
reasonable efforts to obtain FDA approval of specified PCA3
assays and to file an application with the FDA for regulatory
approval of a PCA3 assay in the United States by a specified
date. We also agreed to make annual payments of
$0.5 million to DiagnoCure until specific milestones are
met. We may apply half of the annual payments against future
royalties due and payable to DiagnoCure under the license and
collaboration agreement. We filed a PMA for our PROGENSA PCA3
assay on the DTS system with the FDA in the third quarter of
2010 and also plan to modify our existing PCA3 assay for use
with our PANTHER instrument system in the future.
We also paid $5.0 million to purchase 4.9 million
shares of DiagnoCure preferred stock, which is convertible at
our election into DiagnoCure common stock on a
one-to-one
basis. The preferred stock has a liquidation preference over
DiagnoCures common stock, which is secured by certain
intellectual property collateral. DiagnoCure has the right to
convert the preferred stock into common stock under certain
circumstances and may redeem the preferred stock at any time
prior to conversion at a specified price.
License Agreement with University of
Michigan. In April 2006, we entered into a
license agreement with the University of Michigan, or the
University, for exclusive worldwide rights to develop and
commercialize diagnostic tests for recently discovered genetic
translocations that have been shown in preliminary studies to be
highly specific for prostate cancer tissue. We agreed to pay the
University an up-front fee and royalties on eventual product
sales, as well as development milestones. In addition, we agreed
to fund certain research at the University to discover other
potential prostate cancer translocations. The agreement will
terminate upon the expiration or abandonment of the last to
expire of the licensed patent rights. The University has the
right to terminate the agreement upon written notice to us if we
materially breach the agreement. We may terminate the agreement
upon 45 days written notice to the University,
provided we have paid all amounts owed to the University and
delivered reports and other data due and owing under the
agreement.
Research Agreement with GSK. In June 2005, we
entered into a research agreement with SmithKline Beecham
Corporation, doing business as GlaxoSmithKline, and SmithKline
Beecham (Cork) Ltd., together referred to as GSK. Under the
terms of the agreement, we agreed to provide GSK our
investigational PCA3 assay to test up to 6,800 clinical samples
obtained from patients enrolled in GSKs
REDUCEtm
(REduction by
17
DUtasteride of prostate Cancer Events) clinical trial, which was
designed to determine the efficacy and safety of GSKs drug
dutasteride (AVODART) in reducing the risk of prostate cancer in
men at increased risk of this disease. We agreed to reimburse
GSK for expenses that GSK incurred for sample collection and
related processes during the four-year prospective clinical
trial. We also agreed to provide the PCA3 assay without charge
and to pay third party clinical laboratory expenses for using
the assay to test the samples. The agreement terminates on the
earlier of six years from the commencement date or two years
after certain clinical data is unblinded. GSK may terminate the
agreement upon notice to us and we may terminate the agreement
on specific dates provided certain conditions are met. Each
party may also terminate the agreement for material breaches and
in certain other limited circumstances. The agreement was
amended in 2007 to expand its scope and include testing with our
investigational assay for the TMPRSS gene fusion.
Collaboration Agreement with Pacific
Biosciences. In June 2010, we entered into a
collaboration agreement with Pacific Biosciences regarding the
research and development of instruments integrating our sample
preparation technologies and Pacific Biosciences
single-molecule DNA sequencing technologies for use in clinical
diagnostics. Subject to customary termination rights, the
initial term of the collaboration will end on the earlier of
December 15, 2012 or six months after Pacific Biosciences
demonstrates the proof of concept of its V2
single-molecule DNA sequencing system.
Instrumentation
Agreements with Stratec. In November 2006, we
entered into a development agreement and a supply agreement with
Stratec Biomedical Systems AG, or Stratec, relating to our
PANTHER instrument system. The development agreement provides
for the development of a fully automated, mid-volume molecular
diagnostic instrument by Stratec. Stratec is providing services
for the design and development of the PANTHER instrument system
at a fixed price of $9.4 million, to be paid in
installments due upon achievement of specified technical
milestones. In addition, we will purchase prototype, validation,
pre-production and production instruments, at specified fixed
transfer prices set forth in the development agreement.
Both parties have the right to terminate the development
agreement for insolvency of the other party or for a material
breach that is not cured within 80 days of written notice.
Each of our rights and obligations under the supply agreement is
contingent upon successful completion of the parties
activities under the development agreement. The supply agreement
has an initial term of ten years. Both parties have the right to
terminate the supply agreement for insolvency of the other party
or for a material breach that is not cured within 80 days
of written notice.
Patents
and Proprietary Rights
To establish and protect our proprietary technologies and
products, we rely on a combination of patent, copyright,
trademark and trade secret laws, as well as confidentiality
provisions in our contracts.
We have implemented a patent strategy designed to maximize our
intellectual property rights. We have obtained and are currently
pursuing patent coverage in the United States and those foreign
countries that are home to the majority of our anticipated
customer base. As of December 31, 2010, we owned more than
540 issued United States and foreign patents. In addition, our
patent portfolio includes pending patent applications in the
United States and corresponding international filings in certain
foreign countries. The last of our currently issued patents will
expire by April 28, 2029. In addition, from time to time we
may seek to enter into license agreements with third parties,
pursuant to which we may license certain of our technologies to
third parties in exchange for royalties or other payments as
specified in the applicable license agreement. Our continued
success will depend to a significant degree upon our ability to
develop proprietary products and technologies and to obtain
patent coverage for those products and technologies. We intend
to continue to file patent applications covering novel and newly
developed products and technologies.
We also rely in part on trade secret protection for our
intellectual property. We attempt to protect our trade secrets
by entering into confidentiality agreements with third parties,
employees and consultants. The source code for our proprietary
software is protected both as a trade secret and as copyrighted
work. Our employees also sign agreements requiring that they
assign to us their interests in inventions and original
expressions and any corresponding patents and copyrights arising
from their work for us. However, it is possible that these
18
agreements may be breached, invalidated or rendered
unenforceable, and if so, there may not be an adequate
corrective remedy available to us.
Competition
The medical diagnostics and biotechnology industries are subject
to intense competition. Our competitors in the United States and
abroad are numerous and include, among others, Roche, Abbott
Laboratories, through its subsidiary Abbott Molecular Inc.,
which we refer to collectively as Abbott, Becton, Dickinson and
Company, or BD, Siemens, QIAGEN N.V., or Qiagen, One Lambda,
Inc., or One Lambda, and bioMérieux. All of these companies
are manufacturers of laboratory-based tests and instruments for
the NAT market, and we believe that many of these companies are
developing automated systems similar to our TIGRIS instrument.
In addition, numerous other companies have announced their
intention to enter the market.
Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial,
technical, research and other resources and larger, more
established marketing, sales, distribution and service
organizations than we do. Moreover, many of our competitors
offer broader product lines and have greater brand recognition
than we do, and offer price discounts as a competitive tactic.
In addition, our competitors, many of which have made
substantial investments in competing technologies, may limit or
interfere with our ability to make, use or sell our products
either in the United States or in international markets.
Competitors may make rapid technological developments that may
result in our technologies and products becoming obsolete before
we recover the expenses incurred to develop them or before they
generate significant revenue or market acceptance. Some of our
competitors have developed real time or kinetic
nucleic acid assays and semi-automated instrument systems for
those assays. Additionally, some of our competitors are
developing assays that permit the quantitative detection of
multiple analytes, or quantitative multiplexing. Although we are
evaluating
and/or
developing such technologies, we believe some of our competitors
are further along in the development process than we are.
In the markets for clinical diagnostic products, a number of
competitors, including Roche, Abbott, BD, Siemens, Qiagen,
bioMérieux and Hologic, Inc., or Hologic, compete with us
for product sales, primarily on the basis of technology,
quality, reputation, accuracy, ease of use, price, reliability,
the timing of new product introductions and product line
offerings.
In the market for blood screening products, our primary
competitor is Roche, which received FDA approval of its first
PCR-based NAT tests for blood screening in December 2002. We
also compete with assays developed internally by blood screening
centers and laboratories based on PCR technology. In the future,
our blood screening products may compete with viral inactivation
or reduction technologies and blood substitutes.
Novartis retains certain rights to grant licenses of the patents
related to HCV and HIV to third parties in blood screening using
NAT. Prior to its acquisition by Novartis, Chiron Corporation,
or Chiron, granted HIV and HCV licenses to Roche in the blood
screening and clinical diagnostics fields. Chiron also granted
HIV and HCV licenses in the clinical diagnostics field to Bayer
Healthcare LLC (now Siemens), together with the right to grant
certain additional HIV and HCV sublicenses in the field to third
parties. If Novartis or Siemens grant additional licenses,
further competition will be created for sales of HCV and HIV
assays and these licenses could affect the prices that can be
charged for our products.
Government
Regulation
Our clinical diagnostic products generally are classified in the
United States as devices and are regulated by the
FDAs Center for Devices and Radiological Health, or CDRH.
Our blood screening products generally are classified in the
United States as biologics and are regulated by CBER.
For us to market our clinical diagnostic products as medical
devices in the United States, we generally must first obtain
clearance from the FDA pursuant to Section 510(k) of the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FFDCA, or, if those
products are not considered to be substantially equivalent to a
legally marketed device, approval of a PMA, which requires human
clinical trials. Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance
with Good Clinical Practice under protocols generally submitted
to the FDA.
19
In August 2010, the FDAs CDRH issued two reports outlining
potential changes to the 510(k) regulatory process. In addition,
in January 2011, the CDRH issued an implementation plan
containing 25 specific actions to be implemented in 2011
relating to the 510(k) regulatory process and associated
administrative matters. The CDRH also deferred action on several
other initiatives, including the creation of a new class of
devices that would be subject to heightened review processes,
until the Institute of Medicine, or IOM, issues a related report
on the 510(k) regulatory process, which is expected to be
released in the summer of 2011. Many of the actions proposed by
the CDRH could result in significant changes to the 510(k)
process, which would likely complicate the process of getting
products cleared by the FDA.
After the FDA permits a device to enter commercial distribution,
numerous regulatory requirements apply. In addition to potential
product specific post-approval requirements, all devices are
subject to:
|
|
|
|
|
the Quality System Regulation, which requires manufacturers to
follow comprehensive design, testing, control, documentation and
other quality assurance procedures during the manufacturing
process;
|
|
|
|
labeling regulations;
|
|
|
|
the FDAs general prohibition against promoting products
for unapproved or off-label uses; and
|
|
|
|
the Medical Device Reporting regulation, which requires that
manufacturers report to the FDA if their device may have caused
or contributed to a death or serious injury or malfunctioned in
a way that would likely cause or contribute to a death or
serious injury if it were to reoccur.
|
Failure to comply with the applicable United States medical
device regulatory requirements could result in, among other
things, warning letters, fines, injunctions, civil penalties,
repairs, replacements, refunds, recalls or seizures of products,
total or partial suspension of production, the FDAs
refusal to grant future premarket clearances or approvals,
withdrawals or suspensions of current product applications,
suspension of export certificates and criminal prosecution.
Our blood screening products also are subject to extensive pre-
and post-market regulation as biologics by the FDA, including
regulations that govern the testing, manufacturing, safety,
efficacy, labeling, storage, record keeping, advertising and
promotion of the products under the FFDCA and the Public Health
Service Act, and by comparable agencies in most foreign
countries. The process required by the FDA before a biologic may
be marketed in the United States generally involves the
completion of preclinical testing; the submission of an
investigational new drug, or IND, application which must become
effective before clinical trials may begin; and the performance
of adequate and well controlled human clinical trials to
establish the safety and effectiveness of the proposed
biologics intended use.
The FDA requires approval of a biologics license application, or
BLA, before a licensed biologic may be legally marketed in the
United States. Product approvals may be withdrawn or suspended
if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if
problems occur following initial marketing.
With respect to post-market product advertising and promotion,
the FDA imposes a number of complex regulations on entities that
advertise and promote biologics, which include, among others,
standards and regulations for
direct-to-consumer
advertising, off-label promotion, industry sponsored scientific
and educational activities, and promotional activities involving
the Internet. The FDA has broad enforcement authority under the
FFDCA, and failure to abide by applicable FDA regulations can
result in penalties, including the issuance of a warning letter
requiring corrective advertising, a requirement that future
advertising and promotional materials be pre-cleared by the FDA,
and state and federal civil and criminal investigations and
prosecutions.
We and our contract medical product manufacturers are subject to
periodic inspection by the FDA and other authorities where
applicable, and are required to comply with the applicable FDA
current Good Manufacturing Practice regulations. Good
Manufacturing Practice regulations include requirements relating
to quality control and quality assurance, as well as the
corresponding maintenance of records and documentation, and
provide for manufacturing facilities to be inspected by the FDA.
Manufacturers of biologics also must comply with the FDAs
general biological product regulations. These regulations often
include lot release testing by the FDA.
20
Certain assay reagents may be sold as ASRs without 510(k)
clearance or PMA approval. However, ASR products are subject to
significant restrictions. The manufacturer may not make clinical
or analytical performance claims for the product, may not
promote their use with additional laboratory equipment and may
only sell the product to clinical laboratories that are
qualified to run high complexity tests under CLIA. Each
laboratory must validate the ASR product for use in diagnostic
procedures as a laboratory developed test. We currently offer
several ASR products including ASRs for use in the detection of
the PCA3 gene and for use in the detection of the parasite
Trichomonas vaginalis. In September 2007, the FDA
published guidance for ASRs that define the types of products
that can be sold as ASRs. Under the terms of this guidance and
the ASR Manufacturer Letter issued in June 2008 by
the Office of In Vitro Diagnostic Device Evaluation and Safety
at the FDA, it may be more challenging for us to market some of
our ASR products and we may be required to terminate those ASR
product sales, conduct clinical studies and make submissions of
our products to the FDA for clearance or approval.
Outside the United States, our ability to market our products is
contingent upon maintaining our International Standards
Organization, or ISO, certification, complying with European
directives and in some cases receiving specific marketing
authorization from the appropriate foreign regulatory
authorities. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical
trials, marketing authorization, pricing and reimbursement vary
widely from country to country. Our European Union, or EU,
product registrations cover all member states. Foreign
registration is an ongoing process as we register additional
products
and/or
product modifications.
We are also subject to various state and local laws and
regulations in the United States relating to laboratory
practices and the protection of the environment. In each of
these areas, as above, regulatory agencies have broad regulatory
and enforcement powers, including the ability to levy fines and
civil and criminal penalties, suspend or delay issuance of
approvals, seize or recall products, and withdraw approvals, any
one or more of which could have a material adverse effect on us.
Manufacturing
and Raw Materials
We own two manufacturing facilities in the United States. Our
Genetic Center Drive manufacturing facility in San Diego,
California is dedicated to producing our clinical diagnostic
products. In 1999, we completed our Rancho Bernardo
manufacturing facility in San Diego, California for the
manufacture of our blood screening products. This facility meets
the strict standards set by CBER for the production of blood
screening products. In the U.S we also lease facilities with
manufacturing operations in Stamford, Connecticut and Waukesha,
Wisconsin.
Outside of the U.S., we have manufacturing facilities in Cardiff
and Abingdon in the United Kingdom, as well as in Besancon,
France. In addition, we are in the process of consolidating our
United Kingdom manufacturing operations in our recently expanded
facility in Manchester, which we expect to complete in early
2012. We believe that our existing manufacturing facilities
provide us with capacity to meet the needs of our currently
anticipated growth.
We rely on one contract manufacturer for the production of each
of our instrument product lines. For example, KMC Systems, Inc.,
or KMC Systems, is the only manufacturer of our TIGRIS
instrument. We have no firm long-term commitments from KMC
Systems or any of our other manufacturers to supply products to
us for any specific period, or in any specific quantity, except
as may be provided in a particular purchase order.
We use a diverse and broad range of raw materials in the design,
development and manufacture of our products. Although we produce
some of our materials on site at our manufacturing facilities,
we purchase most of the materials and components used to
manufacture our products from external suppliers. In addition,
we purchase many key raw materials from single source suppliers.
For example, our current supplier of key raw materials for our
amplified NAT assays, pursuant to a fixed-price contract, is the
Roche Molecular Biochemicals division of Roche Diagnostics GmbH,
an affiliate of Roche Molecular Diagnostics, which is one of our
primary competitors. Although we generally consider and identify
alternative suppliers, we do not typically pursue alternative
sources due to the strength of our existing supplier
relationships.
21
Employees
As of December 31, 2010, we had 1,363 full-time
employees, of whom 292 hold advanced degrees, and 105 temporary
employees. Of those full-time and temporary employees, 474 were
in operations, 318 were in research and development, 252 were in
sales and marketing, 219 were in general and administrative, and
205 were in regulatory, clinical and quality systems. None of
our employees is covered by a collective bargaining agreement,
and we consider our relationship with our employees to be good.
Geographic
Information
For geographic information regarding our revenues, see
Note 16 to the Consolidated Financial Statements included
elsewhere in this report.
Our
quarterly revenue and operating results may vary significantly
in future periods and our stock price may decline.
Our operating results have fluctuated in the past and are likely
to continue to do so in the future. Our revenues are
unpredictable and may fluctuate due to changes in demand for our
products, including fluctuations in demand for blood screening
tests from our blood screening collaboration partner Novartis,
the timing of acquisitions, the execution of customer contracts,
the receipt of milestone payments, or the failure to achieve and
receive the same, and the initiation or termination of corporate
collaboration agreements. In addition, a significant portion of
our costs can also vary substantially between quarterly or
annual reporting periods. For example, the total amount of
research and development costs in a period often depends on the
amount of costs we incur in connection with manufacturing
developmental lots and clinical trial lots. Moreover, a variety
of factors may affect our ability to make accurate forecasts
regarding our operating results. For example, certain of our
products have a relatively limited sales history, which limits
our ability to accurately project future sales, prices and
related sales cycles. In addition, we base our internal
projections of blood screening product sales and international
sales of various diagnostic products on projections prepared by
our distributors of these products and therefore we are
dependent upon the accuracy of those projections. We expect
continuing fluctuations in our manufacture and shipment of blood
screening products and instruments to Novartis, which vary each
period based on Novartis inventory levels and supply chain
needs. In addition, our respiratory infectious disease product
line is subject to significant seasonal fluctuations. Because of
all of these factors, our operating results in one or more
future quarters may fail to meet or exceed financial guidance we
may provide from time to time and the expectations of securities
analysts or investors, which could cause our stock price to
decline. In addition, the trading market for our common stock
will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or
securities analysts publish about our business and that of our
competitors. Furthermore, failure to achieve our operational
goals may inhibit our targeted growth plans and the successful
implementation of our strategic objectives.
Our
financial performance may be adversely affected by current
global economic conditions.
Our business depends on the overall demand for our products and
on the economic health of our current and prospective customers.
Our projected revenues and operating results are based on
assumptions concerning certain levels of customer demand.
Although these effects are difficult to quantify, we believe
that relative to our expectations we have experienced modest
declines in product sales growth rates in recent periods, due in
part to current macroeconomic conditions and pressures on
healthcare utilization. A continued weakening of the global and
domestic economies, or a reduction in customer spending or
credit availability, could result in downward pricing pressures,
delayed or decreased purchases of our products and longer sales
cycles. Furthermore, during challenging economic times our
customers may face issues gaining timely access to sufficient
credit, which could result in an impairment of their ability to
make timely payments to us. If that were to occur, we may be
required to increase our allowance for doubtful accounts. If
economic and market conditions in the United States or other key
markets persist, spread, or deteriorate further, we may
experience adverse effects on our business, operating results
and financial condition.
22
We are
dependent on Novartis and other third parties for the
distribution of some of our products. If any of our distributors
terminates its relationship with us or fails to adequately
perform, our product sales will suffer.
We rely on Novartis to distribute blood screening products we
manufacture. Commercial product sales to Novartis accounted for
39% and 41% of our total revenues for 2010 and 2009,
respectively. In January 2009, we extended the term of our blood
screening collaboration with Novartis to June 30, 2025,
subject to earlier termination under certain limited
circumstances specified in the collaboration agreement. In
addition, we supply our transcription-mediated amplification, or
TMA, assay for the qualitative detection of HCV and analyte
specific reagents, or ASRs, for the quantitative detection of
HCV to Siemens pursuant to a collaboration agreement.
We rely upon bioMérieux for distribution of certain of our
products in most of Europe and Australia, Fujirebio for
distribution of certain of our products in Japan, and various
independent distributors for distribution of our products in
other regions. Distribution rights revert back to us upon
termination of the distribution agreements. Our distribution
agreements with Fujirebio and bioMérieux expire in December
2012 and May 2012, respectively, although each agreement may
terminate earlier under certain circumstances.
If any of our distribution or marketing agreements is
terminated, particularly our collaboration agreement with
Novartis, or if we elect to distribute new products directly, we
will have to invest in additional sales and marketing resources,
including additional field sales personnel, which would
significantly increase future selling, general and
administrative expenses. We may not be able to enter into new
distribution or marketing agreements on satisfactory terms, or
at all. If we fail to enter into acceptable distribution or
marketing agreements or fail to successfully market our
products, our product sales will decrease.
If we
cannot maintain our current corporate collaborations and enter
into new corporate collaborations, our product development could
be delayed. In particular, any failure by us to maintain our
blood screening collaboration with Novartis would have a
material adverse effect on our business.
We rely, to a significant extent, on our corporate collaborators
for funding development for and marketing certain of our
products. In addition, we expect to rely on our corporate
collaborators for the commercialization of certain products. If
any of our corporate collaborators were to breach or terminate
its agreement with us or otherwise fail to conduct its
collaborative activities successfully and in a timely manner,
the development or commercialization and subsequent marketing of
the products contemplated by the collaboration could be delayed
or terminated. We cannot control the amount and timing of
resources our corporate collaborators devote to our programs or
potential products.
In June 2010, for example, we entered into a collaboration
agreement with Pacific Biosciences regarding the research and
development of instruments integrating our sample preparation
technologies and Pacific Biosciences single-molecule DNA
sequencing technologies for use in clinical diagnostics. Subject
to customary termination rights, the initial term of the
collaboration will end on the earlier of December 15, 2012
and six months after Pacific Biosciences demonstrates the proof
of concept of its V2 single-molecule DNA sequencing
system.
The continuation of any of our collaboration agreements depends
on their periodic renewal by us and our collaborators. For
example, in January 2009 we extended the term of our blood
screening collaboration with Novartis to June 30, 2025,
subject to earlier termination under certain limited
circumstances specified in the collaboration agreement. The
collaboration was previously scheduled to expire by its terms in
2013.
If any of our current collaboration agreements is terminated, or
if we are unable to renew those collaborations on acceptable
terms, we would be required to devote additional internal
resources to product development or marketing or to terminate
some development programs or seek alternative corporate
collaborations. We may not be able to negotiate additional
corporate collaborations on acceptable terms, if at all, and
these collaborations may not be successful. In addition, in the
event of a dispute under our current or any future collaboration
agreements, such as those under our agreements with Novartis,
Siemens and Pacific Biosciences, a court or arbitrator may not
rule in our favor and our rights or obligations under an
agreement subject to a dispute may be adversely affected, which
may have an adverse effect on our business or operating results.
23
We may
acquire other businesses or form collaborations, strategic
alliances and joint ventures that could decrease our
profitability, result in dilution to stockholders or cause us to
incur debt or significant expense, and acquired companies or
technologies could be difficult to integrate and could disrupt
our business.
As part of our business strategy, we intend to pursue
acquisitions of complementary businesses and enter into
technology licensing arrangements. We also intend to pursue
strategic alliances that leverage our core technology and
industry experience to expand our product offerings and
geographic presence. We have limited experience in acquiring
other companies. Any future acquisitions by us could result in
large and immediate write-offs or the incurrence of debt and
contingent liabilities, any of which could harm our operating
results. Integration of an acquired company may also require
management resources that otherwise would be available for
ongoing development of our existing business. We may not
identify or complete these transactions in a timely manner, on a
cost-effective basis, or at all.
In April 2009, we acquired Tepnel, which we believe provides us
with access to growth opportunities in transplant diagnostics,
genetic testing and pharmaceutical services, as well as
accelerates our ongoing strategic efforts to strengthen our
marketing and sales, distribution and manufacturing capabilities
in Europe. In October 2009 we acquired Prodesse, which we
believe supports our strategic focus on commercializing
differentiated molecular tests for infectious diseases. In
addition, in December 2010, we acquired GTI Diagnostics, which
we believe will strengthen our transplant diagnostics business,
and provide us access to the specialty coagulation and
transfusion-related blood bank markets. Our beliefs regarding
the merits of these acquisitions are based upon numerous
assumptions that are subject to risks and uncertainties that
could deviate materially from our expectations, and could
adversely affect our operating results.
Managing the acquisitions of Tepnel, Prodesse and GTI
Diagnostics, as well as any other future acquisitions, will
entail numerous operational and financial risks, including:
|
|
|
|
|
the anticipated financial performance and estimated cost savings
and other synergies as a result of the acquisitions may not
materialize;
|
|
|
|
the inability to retain or replace key employees of any acquired
businesses or hire enough qualified personnel to staff any new
or expanded operations;
|
|
|
|
the impairment of relationships with key customers of acquired
businesses due to changes in management and ownership of the
acquired businesses;
|
|
|
|
the exposure to federal, state, local and foreign tax
liabilities in connection with any acquisition or the
integration of any acquired businesses;
|
|
|
|
the exposure to unknown liabilities;
|
|
|
|
higher than expected acquisition and integration costs that
could cause our quarterly and annual operating results to
fluctuate;
|
|
|
|
increased amortization expenses if an acquisition includes
significant intangible assets;
|
|
|
|
combining the operations and personnel of acquired businesses
with our own, which could be difficult and costly;
|
|
|
|
the risk of entering new markets; and
|
|
|
|
integrating, or completing the development and application of,
any acquired technologies and personnel with diverse business
and cultural backgrounds, which could disrupt our business and
divert our managements time and attention.
|
To finance any acquisitions, we may choose to issue shares of
our common stock as consideration, which would result in
dilution to our stockholders. If the price of our equity is low
or volatile, we may not be able to use our common stock as
consideration to acquire other companies. Alternatively, it may
be necessary for us to raise additional funds through public or
private financings. Additional funds may not be available on
terms that are favorable to us, or at all.
24
Our
future success will depend in part upon our ability to enhance
existing products and to develop, introduce and commercialize
new products.
The markets for our products are characterized by rapidly
changing technology, evolving industry standards and new product
introductions, which may make our existing products obsolete.
Our future success will depend in part upon our ability to
enhance existing products and to develop and introduce new
products. We believe that we will need to continue to provide
new products that can detect and quantify a greater number of
organisms from a single sample. We also believe that we must
develop new assays that can be performed on automated instrument
platforms. The development of new instrument platforms, if any,
in turn may require the modification of existing assays for use
with the new instrument, and additional time-consuming and
costly regulatory approvals. For example, our failure to
successfully develop and commercialize our PANTHER instrument
system on a timely basis could have a negative impact on our
financial performance.
The development of new or enhanced products is a complex and
uncertain process requiring the accurate anticipation of
technological, market and medical practice trends, as well as
precise technological execution. In addition, the successful
development of new products will depend on the development of
new technologies. We may be required to undertake time-consuming
and costly development activities and to seek regulatory
approval for these new products. We may experience difficulties
that could delay or prevent the successful development,
introduction and marketing of these new products. We have
experienced delays in receiving FDA clearance in the past.
Regulatory clearance or approval of any new products we may
develop, such as our APTIMA HPV, APTIMA Trichomonas and PROGENSA
PCA3 assays, may not be granted by the FDA or foreign regulatory
authorities on a timely basis, or at all, and these and other
new products may not be successfully commercialized. Failure to
timely achieve regulatory approval for our products and
introduce products to market could negatively affect our growth
objectives and financial performance.
We
face intense competition, and our failure to compete effectively
could decrease our revenues and harm our profitability and
results of operations.
The clinical diagnostics industry is highly competitive.
Currently, the majority of diagnostic tests used by physicians
and other health care providers are performed by large
reference, public health and hospital laboratories. We expect
that these laboratories will compete vigorously to maintain
their dominance in the diagnostic testing market. In order to
achieve market acceptance of our products, we will be required
to demonstrate that our products provide accurate,
cost-effective and time saving alternatives to tests performed
by traditional laboratory procedures and products made by our
competitors.
In the markets for clinical diagnostic products, a number of
competitors, including Roche, Abbott, BD, Siemens, QIAGEN, One
Lambda, bioMérieux, and Hologic, currently compete with us
for product sales, primarily on the basis of technology,
quality, reputation, accuracy, ease of use, price, reliability,
the timing of new product introductions and product line
offerings. Our existing competitors or new market entrants may
be in better position than we are to respond quickly to new or
emerging technologies, may be able to undertake more extensive
marketing campaigns, may adopt more aggressive pricing policies
and may be more successful in attracting potential customers,
employees and strategic partners. Many of our competitors have,
and in the future these and other competitors may have,
significantly greater financial, marketing, sales,
manufacturing, distribution and technological resources than we
do. Moreover, these companies may have substantially greater
expertise in conducting clinical trials and research and
development, greater ability to obtain necessary intellectual
property licenses and greater brand recognition than we do, any
of which may adversely affect our customer retention and market
share.
Competitors may make rapid technological developments that may
result in our technologies and products becoming obsolete before
we recover the expenses incurred to develop them or before they
generate significant revenue or market acceptance. Some of our
competitors have developed real time or kinetic
nucleic acid assays and semi-automated instrument systems for
those assays. Additionally, some of our competitors are
developing assays that permit the quantitative detection of
multiple analytes (or quantitative multiplexing). Although we
are evaluating
and/or
developing such technologies, we believe some of our competitors
are further along in the development process than we are with
respect to such assays and instrumentation.
25
In the market for blood screening products, the primary
competitor to our collaboration with Novartis is Roche, which
received FDA approval of its PCR-based NAT tests for blood
screening in December 2002 and received FDA approval of a
multiplex real-time PCR assay to screen donated blood in
December 2008. Our collaboration with Novartis also competes
with blood banks and laboratories that have internally developed
assays based on PCR technology, Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics,
Inc., a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson that markets
an HCV antigen assay, and Abbott and Siemens with respect to
immunoassay products. In the future, our collaboration blood
screening products also may compete with viral inactivation or
reduction technologies and blood substitutes.
We believe the global blood screening market is maturing
rapidly. We believe the competitive position of our blood
screening collaboration with Novartis in the United States
remains strong. However, outside of the United States, blood
screening testing volume is generally more decentralized than in
the United States, customer contracts typically turn over more
rapidly and the number of new countries yet to adopt nucleic
acid testing for blood screening is diminishing. As a result, we
believe geographic expansion opportunities for our blood
screening collaboration with Novartis may be narrowing and that
we will face increasing price competition within the nucleic
acid blood screening market.
Novartis also retains certain rights to grant licenses of the
patents related to HCV and HIV to third parties in blood
screening using NAT. Prior to its merger with Novartis, Chiron
granted HIV and HCV licenses to Roche in the blood screening and
clinical diagnostics fields. Chiron also granted HIV and HCV
licenses in the clinical diagnostics field to Bayer Healthcare
LLC (now Siemens), together with the right to grant certain
additional HIV and HCV sublicenses in the field to third
parties. We believe Bayers rights have now been assigned
to Siemens as part of Bayers December 2006 sale of its
diagnostics business. Chiron also granted an HCV license to
Abbott and an HIV license to Organon Teknika (now
bioMérieux) in the clinical diagnostics field. If Novartis
grants additional licenses in blood screening or Siemens grants
additional licenses in clinical diagnostics, further competition
will be created for sales of HCV and HIV assays and these
licenses could affect the prices that can be charged for our
products.
Failure
to manufacture our products in accordance with product
specifications could result in increased costs, lost revenues,
customer dissatisfaction or voluntary product recalls, any of
which could harm our profitability and commercial
reputation.
Properly manufacturing our complex nucleic acid products
requires precise technological execution and strict compliance
with regulatory requirements. We may experience problems in the
manufacturing process for a number of reasons, such as equipment
malfunction or failure to follow specific protocols. If problems
arise during the production of a particular product lot, that
product lot may need to be discarded or destroyed. This could,
among other things, result in increased costs, lost revenues and
customer dissatisfaction. If problems are not discovered before
the product lot is released to the market, we may incur recall
and product liability costs. In the past, we have voluntarily
recalled certain product lots for failure to meet product
specifications. Any failure to manufacture our products in
accordance with product specifications could have a material
adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and commercial
reputation.
Disruptions
in the supply of raw materials and consumable goods or issues
associated with their quality from our single source suppliers,
including Roche Molecular Biochemicals, which is an affiliate of
one of our primary competitors, could result in a significant
disruption in sales and profitability.
We purchase some key raw materials and consumable goods used in
the manufacture of our products from single-source suppliers. If
we cannot obtain sufficient raw materials from our key
suppliers, production of our own products may be delayed or
disrupted. In addition, we may not be able to obtain supplies
from replacement suppliers on a timely or cost-effective basis,
or at all. A reduction or stoppage in supply while we seek a
replacement supplier would limit our ability to manufacture our
products, which could result in a significant reduction in sales
and profitability.
In addition, an impurity or variation from specification in any
raw material we receive could significantly delay our ability to
manufacture products. Our inventories may not be adequate to
meet our production needs during any prolonged supply
interruption. We also have single source suppliers for proposed
future products. Failure to
26
maintain existing supply relationships or to obtain suppliers
for our future products on commercially reasonable terms would
prevent us from manufacturing our products and limit our growth.
Our current supplier of certain key raw materials for our
amplified NAT assays, pursuant to a fixed-price contract, is
Roche Molecular Biochemicals. We have a supply and purchase
agreement for oligonucleotides for HPV with Roche Molecular
Systems. Each of these entities is an affiliate of Roche
Diagnostics GmbH, one of our primary competitors.
We
have only one third-party manufacturer for each of our
instrument product lines, which exposes us to increased risks
associated with production delays, delivery schedules,
manufacturing capability, quality control, quality assurance and
costs.
We have one third-party manufacturer for each of our instrument
product lines. KMC Systems is the only manufacturer of our
TIGRIS instrument; MGM Instruments, Inc., or MGM Instruments, is
the only manufacturer of our LEADER series of luminometers; and
Stratec is the only manufacturer of our PANTHER instrument
system. We are dependent on these third-party manufacturers, and
this dependence exposes us to increased risks associated with
production delays, delivery schedules, manufacturing capability,
quality control, quality assurance and costs.
We have no firm long-term commitments from KMC Systems, MGM
Instruments or Stratec to supply products to us for any specific
period, or in any specific quantity, except as may be provided
in a particular purchase order. If KMC Systems, MGM Instruments,
Stratec or any of our other third-party manufacturers
experiences delays, disruptions, capacity constraints or quality
control problems in its development or manufacturing operations
or becomes insolvent or otherwise fails to supply us with
products in sufficient quantities, then instrument shipments to
our customers could be delayed, which would decrease our
revenues and harm our competitive position and reputation.
Further, because we place orders with our manufacturers based on
forecasts of expected demand for our instruments, if we
inaccurately forecast demand we may be unable to obtain adequate
manufacturing capacity or adequate quantities of components to
meet our customers delivery requirements, or we may
accumulate excess inventories.
We may in the future need to find new contract manufacturers to
replace existing suppliers, increase our volumes or reduce our
costs. We may not be able to find contract manufacturers that
meet our needs, and even if we do, qualifying a new contract
manufacturer and commencing volume production is expensive and
time consuming. For example, we believe qualifying a new
manufacturer of our TIGRIS instrument would take approximately
12 months and require regulatory approvals. If we are
required or elect to change contract manufacturers, we may lose
revenues and our customer relationships may suffer.
We and
our customers are subject to various governmental regulations,
and we may incur significant expenses to comply with, and
experience delays in commercializing, or be unable to
commercialize, our products as a result of, these
regulations.
The clinical diagnostic and blood screening products we design,
develop, manufacture and market are subject to rigorous
regulation by the FDA and numerous other federal, state and
foreign governmental authorities. We generally are prohibited
from marketing our clinical diagnostic products in the United
States unless we obtain either 510(k) clearance or premarket
approval from the FDA. In August 2010, the FDAs CDRH
issued two reports outlining potential changes to the 510(k)
regulatory process. In addition, in January 2011, the CDRH
issued an implementation plan containing 25 specific actions to
be implemented in 2011 relating to the 510(k) regulatory process
and associated administrative matters. The CDRH also deferred
action on several other initiatives, including the creation of a
new class of devices that would be subject to heightened review
processes, until the IOM issues a related report on the 510(k)
regulatory process, which is expected to be released in the
summer of 2011. Many of the actions proposed by the CDRH could
result in significant changes to the 510(k) process, which would
likely complicate the process of getting products cleared by the
FDA. Delays in receipt of, or failure to obtain, clearances or
approvals for future products could delay or preclude
realization of product revenues from new products or result in
substantial additional costs which could decrease our
profitability.
Outside the United States, our ability to market our products is
contingent upon maintaining our certification with the
International Organization for Standardization, and in some
cases receiving specific marketing
27
authorization from the appropriate foreign regulatory
authorities. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical
trials, marketing authorization, pricing and reimbursement vary
widely from country to country. Our EU foreign marketing
authorizations cover all member states. Foreign registration is
an ongoing process as we register additional products
and/or
product modifications.
The process of seeking and obtaining regulatory approvals,
particularly from the FDA and some foreign governmental
authorities, to market our products can be costly and time
consuming, and approvals might not be granted for future
products on a timely basis, if at all. In addition, unexpected
complications in conducting trials could cause us to incur
unanticipated expenses or result in delays or difficulties in
receiving FDA approval. For example, when we started the
U.S. clinical trial for our investigational APTIMA HPV
assay we originally expected that we would enroll and test
approximately 7,000 women. However, we actually enrolled
approximately 13,000 women in the trial based on the actual
prevalence of cervical disease observed. Although we submitted a
PMA to the FDA for our investigational APTIMA HPV assay on the
TIGRIS system in the fourth quarter of 2010, we cannot provide
any assurances that the FDA will ultimately approve the use of
our APTIMA HPV assay. We have also recently submitted
applications to the FDA for clearance or approval of a number of
other assays, including our APTIMA Trichomonas vaginalis assay
and our PROGENSA PCA3 assay. There can be no assurance that any
of these assays will be approved for sale in the United States
on a timeline consistent with our expectations, or at all.
Failure to obtain or delay in obtaining FDA approval of any of
our newly developed assays could have a material adverse effect
on our financial performance.
We are also required to continue to comply with applicable FDA
and other regulatory requirements once we have obtained
clearance or approval for a product. These requirements include,
among other things, the Quality System Regulation, labeling
requirements, the FDAs general prohibition against
promoting products for unapproved or off-label uses
and adverse event reporting regulations. Failure to comply with
applicable FDA product regulatory requirements could result in,
among other things, warning letters, fines, injunctions, civil
penalties, repairs, replacements, refunds, recalls or seizures
of products, total or partial suspension of production, the
FDAs refusal to grant future premarket clearances or
approvals, withdrawals or suspensions of current product
applications and criminal prosecution. Any of these actions, in
combination or alone, could prevent us from selling our products
and harm our business.
Certain assay reagents may be sold in the United States as ASRs
without 510(k) clearance or premarket approval from the FDA.
However, the FDA restricts the sale of these ASR products to
clinical laboratories certified to perform high complexity
testing under the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments, or
CLIA, and also restricts the types of products that can be sold
as ASRs. In addition, each laboratory must validate the ASR
product for use in diagnostic procedures as a laboratory
developed test. We currently offer several ASR products
including ASRs for use in the detection of PCA3 mRNA and for use
in the detection of the parasite Trichomonas vaginalis.
We also have developed an ASR for quantitative HCV testing
that Siemens provides to Quest Diagnostics Incorporated. In
September 2007, the FDA published guidance that defines the
types of products that can be sold as ASRs. Under the terms of
this guidance and the ASR Manufacturer Letter issued
in June 2008 by the Office of In Vitro Diagnostic Device
Evaluation and Safety at the FDA, it may be more challenging for
us to market some of our ASR products and we may be required to
terminate those ASR product sales, conduct clinical studies and
make submissions of our ASR products to the FDA for clearance or
approval.
The use of our diagnostic products is also affected by CLIA and
related federal and state regulations governing laboratory
testing. CLIA is intended to ensure the quality and reliability
of clinical laboratories in the United States by mandating
specific standards in the areas of personnel qualifications,
administration, participation in proficiency testing, patient
test management, quality and inspections. Current or future CLIA
requirements or the promulgation of additional regulations
affecting laboratory testing may prevent some clinical
laboratories from using some or all of our diagnostic products.
As both the FDA and foreign government regulators have become
increasingly stringent, we may be subject to more rigorous
regulation by governmental authorities in the future. Complying
with these rules and regulations could cause us to incur
significant additional expenses and delays in launching
products, which would harm our operating results.
28
Our
products are subject to recalls even after receiving FDA
approval or clearance.
The FDA and governmental bodies in other countries have the
authority to require the recall of our products if we fail to
comply with relevant regulations pertaining to product
manufacturing, quality, labeling, advertising, or promotional
activities, or if new information is obtained concerning the
safety of a product. Our assay products incorporate complex
biochemical reagents and our instruments comprise complex
hardware and software. We have in the past voluntarily recalled
products, which, in each case, required us to identify a problem
and correct it. In December 2008, we recalled certain AccuProbe
test kits after receiving a customer complaint indicating the
customer had received a kit containing a probe reagent tube that
appeared upon visual inspection to be empty. We confirmed that a
manufacturing error had occurred, corrected the problem,
recalled all potentially affected products, provided
replacements and notified the FDA and other appropriate
authorities.
Although none of our past product recalls had a material adverse
effect on our business, our products may be subject to a future
government-mandated recall or a voluntary recall, and any such
recall could divert managerial and financial resources, could be
more difficult and costly to correct, could result in the
suspension of sales of our products and could harm our financial
results and our reputation.
Our
gross profit margin percentage on the sale of blood screening
assays will decrease upon the implementation of smaller pool
size testing.
We currently receive revenues from the sale of blood screening
assays primarily for use with pooled donor samples. In pooled
testing, multiple donor samples are initially screened by a
single test. Since Novartis sells blood screening assays under
our collaboration to blood screening centers on a per donation
basis, our profit margins are greater when a single test can be
used to screen multiple donor samples.
We believe certain blood screening markets are trending from
pooled testing of large numbers of donor samples to smaller pool
sizes. A greater number of tests will be required in markets
where smaller pool sizes are required. Under our amended and
restated collaboration agreement with Novartis, we bear half of
the cost of manufacturing blood screening assays. The greater
number of tests required for smaller pool sizes will increase
our variable manufacturing costs, including costs of raw
materials and labor. If the price per donor or total sales
volume does not increase in line with the increase in our total
variable manufacturing costs, our gross profit margin percentage
from sales of blood screening assays will decrease upon adoption
of smaller pool sizes. We have already observed this trend with
respect to certain sales internationally. We are not able to
predict accurately the ultimate extent to which our gross profit
margin percentage will be negatively affected as a result of
smaller pool sizes, because we do not know the ultimate selling
price that Novartis would charge to the end user or the degree
to which smaller pool size testing will be adopted across the
markets in which our products are sold.
Because
we depend on a small number of customers for a significant
portion of our total revenues, the loss of any of these
customers or any cancellation or delay of a large purchase by
any of these customers could significantly reduce our
revenues.
Historically, a limited number of customers have accounted for a
significant portion of our total revenues, and we do not have
any long-term commitments with these customers, other than our
collaboration agreement with Novartis. Total revenues from our
blood screening collaboration with Novartis, which include
product sales, collaborative research revenues and royalties,
accounted for 40% and 42% of our total revenues for 2010 and
2009, respectively. Our blood screening collaboration with
Novartis is largely dependent on three large customers in the
United States, The American Red Cross, Americas Blood
Centers and Creative Testing Solutions, although we do not
receive any revenues directly from those entities. Novartis was
our only customer that accounted for greater than 10% of total
revenues during 2010. However, various state and city public
health agencies accounted for an aggregate of 8% of our total
revenues for both 2010 and 2009. Although state and city public
health agencies are legally independent of each other, we
believe they tend to act similarly with respect to their product
purchasing decisions. We anticipate that our operating results
will continue to depend to a significant extent upon revenues
from a small number of customers. The loss of any of our key
customers, or a significant reduction in sales volume or pricing
to those customers, could significantly reduce our revenues.
29
Intellectual
property rights on which we rely to protect the technologies
underlying our products may be inadequate to prevent third
parties from using our technologies or developing competing
products.
Our success will depend in part on our ability to obtain patent
protection for, or maintain the secrecy of, our proprietary
products, processes and other technologies for the development
of blood screening and clinical diagnostic products and
instruments. Although we had more than 540 U.S. and foreign
patents covering our products and technologies as of
December 31, 2010, these patents, or any patents that we
may own or license in the future, may not afford meaningful
protection for our technology and products. The pursuit and
assertion of a patent right, particularly in areas like nucleic
acid diagnostics and biotechnology, involve complex
determinations and, therefore, are characterized by substantial
uncertainty. In addition, the laws governing patentability and
the scope of patent coverage continue to evolve, particularly in
biotechnology. As a result, patents might not issue from certain
of our patent applications or from applications licensed to us.
Our existing patents will expire by April 28, 2029 and the
patents we may obtain in the future also will expire over time.
The scope of any of our issued patents may not be broad enough
to offer meaningful protection. In addition, others may
challenge our current patents or patents we may obtain in the
future and, as a result, these patents could be narrowed,
invalidated or rendered unenforceable, or we may be forced to
stop using the technology covered by these patents or to license
technology from third parties.
The laws of some foreign countries may not protect our
proprietary rights to the same extent as do the laws of the
United States. Any patents issued to us or our collaborators may
not provide us with any competitive advantages, and the patents
held by other parties may limit our freedom to conduct our
business or use our technologies. Our efforts to enforce and
maintain our intellectual property rights may not be successful
and may result in substantial costs and diversion of management
time. Even if our rights are valid, enforceable and broad in
scope, third parties may develop competing products based on
technology that is not covered by our patents.
In addition to patent protection, we also rely on copyright and
trademark protection, trade secrets, know-how, continued
technological innovation and licensing opportunities. In an
effort to maintain the confidentiality and ownership of our
trade secrets and proprietary information, we require our
employees, consultants, advisors and others to whom we disclose
confidential information to execute confidentiality and
proprietary information and inventions agreements. However, it
is possible that these agreements may be breached, invalidated
or rendered unenforceable, and if so, adequate corrective
remedies may not be available. Furthermore, like many companies
in our industry, we may from time to time hire scientific
personnel formerly employed by other companies involved in one
or more areas similar to the activities we conduct. In some
situations, our confidentiality and proprietary information and
inventions agreements may conflict with, or be subject to, the
rights of third parties with whom our employees, consultants or
advisors have prior employment or consulting relationships.
Although we require our employees and consultants to maintain
the confidentiality of all confidential information of previous
employers, we or these individuals may be subject to allegations
of trade secret misappropriation or other similar claims as a
result of their prior affiliations. Finally, others may
independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary
information and techniques, or otherwise gain access to our
trade secrets. Our failure to protect our proprietary
information and techniques may inhibit or limit our ability to
exclude certain competitors from the market and execute our
business strategies.
The
diagnostic products industry has a history of patent and other
intellectual property litigation, and we have been and may
continue to be involved in costly intellectual property
lawsuits.
The diagnostic products industry has a history of patent and
other intellectual property litigation, and these lawsuits
likely will continue. From
time-to-time
in the ordinary course of business, we receive communications
from third parties calling our attention to patents or other
intellectual property rights owned by them, with the implicit or
explicit suggestion that we may need to acquire a license of
such rights. We have faced in the past, and may face in the
future, patent infringement lawsuits by companies that control
patents for products and services similar to ours or other
lawsuits alleging infringement by us of their intellectual
property rights. In order to protect or enforce our intellectual
property rights, we may choose to initiate legal proceedings
against third parties. Legal proceedings relating to
intellectual property typically are expensive, take significant
time and divert managements attention from other business
concerns. The cost of such litigation could adversely affect our
results of operations,
30
making us less profitable. Further, if we do not prevail in an
infringement lawsuit brought against us, we might have to pay
substantial damages, including treble damages, and we could be
required to stop the infringing activity or obtain a license to
use the patented technology.
In October 2009, we filed a patent infringement action against
BD in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
California. The complaint alleges that BDs
Vipertm
XTRtm
testing system infringes five of our U.S. patents covering
automated processes for preparing, amplifying and detecting
nucleic acid targets. The complaint also alleges that BDs
ProbeTectm
Female Endocervical and Male Urethral Specimen Collection Kits
for Amplified Chlamydia trachomatis/Neisseria gonorrhoeae
(CT/GC) DNA assays used with the Viper XTR testing system
infringe two of our U.S. patents covering penetrable caps
for specimen collection tubes. Finally, the complaint alleges
that BD has infringed our U.S. patent on methods and kits
for destroying the ability of a nucleic acid to be amplified;
however, we have moved to dismiss this specific claim from the
lawsuit, while maintaining all other claims. The complaint seeks
monetary damages and injunctive relief. In March 2010, we filed
a second complaint for patent infringement against BD in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
alleging that BDs BD MAX
Systemtm
(formerly known as the HandyLab Jaguar system) infringes four of
our U.S. patents covering automated processes for
preparing, amplifying and detecting nucleic acid targets. The
second complaint also seeks monetary damages and injunctive
relief. In June 2010, these two actions were consolidated into a
single legal proceeding. There can be no assurances as to the
final outcome of this litigation.
Pursuant to our collaboration agreement with Novartis, we hold
certain rights in the blood screening and clinical diagnostics
fields under patents originally issued to Novartis covering the
detection of HIV. We sell a qualitative HIV test in the clinical
diagnostics field and we manufacture tests for HIV for use in
the blood screening field, which Novartis sells under
Novartis brands and name. In February 2005, the
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office declared two interferences
related to U.S. Patent No. 6,531,276 (Methods
For Detecting Human Immunodeficiency Virus Nucleic Acid),
originally issued to Novartis. The first interference was
between Novartis and the National Institutes of Health, or NIH,
and pertained to U.S. Patent Application
No. 06/693,866
(Cloning and Expression of HTLV-III DNA). The second
interference was between Novartis and Institut Pasteur, and
pertained to Institut Pasteurs U.S. Patent
Application No. 07/999,410 (Cloned
DNA Sequences, Hybridizable with Genomic RNA of
Lymphadenopathy-Associated Virus (LAV)). We are informed
that the Patent and Trademark Office determined that Institut
Pasteur invented the subject matter at issue prior to NIH and
Novartis. We are also informed that Novartis and NIH
subsequently filed actions in the U.S. District Court for
the District of Columbia challenging the decisions of the Patent
and Trademark Office in the patent interference cases. From
November 2007 through September 2008, the parties engaged in
settlement negotiations and then notified the court that they
had signed a memorandum of understanding prior to the
negotiation of final, definitive settlement documents. In May
2008, we signed a license agreement with Institut Pasteur
concerning Institut Pasteurs intellectual property for the
molecular detection of HIV, covering products manufactured and
sold through, and under, our brands or name. In September 2008,
the parties to the pending litigation in the U.S. District
Court for the District of Columbia informed the court that they
were unable to reach a final, definitive agreement and intended
to proceed with litigation. There can be no assurances as to the
ultimate outcome of the interference litigation and no
assurances as to how the outcome of the interference litigation
may affect the patent rights we licensed from Institut Pasteur,
or Novartis right to sell HIV blood screening tests.
The
U.S. health care reform law could adversely affect our business,
profitability and stock price.
Comprehensive health care reform legislation has been signed
into law in the United States. Although we cannot fully predict
the many ways that health care reform might affect our business,
the law imposes a 2.3% excise tax on certain transactions,
including many U.S. sales of medical devices, which we
expect will include U.S. sales of our assays and
instruments. This tax is scheduled to take effect in 2013. It is
unclear whether and to what extent, if at all, other anticipated
developments resulting from health care reform, such as an
increase in the number of people with health insurance and an
increased focus on preventive medicine, may provide us
additional revenue to offset this increased tax. If additional
revenue does not materialize, or if our efforts to offset the
excise tax through price increases, spending cuts or other
actions are unsuccessful, the increased tax burden would
adversely affect our financial performance, which in turn could
cause the price of our stock to decline.
31
Our
indebtedness could adversely affect our financial
health.
In February 2009, we entered into a credit agreement with Bank
of America which provided for a one-year senior secured
revolving credit facility in an amount of up to
$180.0 million that is subject to a borrowing base formula.
The revolving credit facility has a
sub-limit
for the issuance of letters of credit in a face amount of up to
$10.0 million. In March 2009, we and Bank of America
amended the credit facility to increase the amount which we may
borrow from time to time under the credit agreement from
$180.0 million to $250.0 million. As of
February 18, 2011, the total principal amount outstanding
under the revolving credit facility was $250.0 million. The
term of our credit facility with Bank of America has been
extended twice and currently expires in February 2012.
Our indebtedness could have important consequences. For example,
it could:
|
|
|
|
|
increase our vulnerability to general adverse economic and
industry conditions;
|
|
|
|
have a material adverse effect on our business and financial
condition if we are unable to service our indebtedness or
refinance such indebtedness;
|
|
|
|
limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes
in our business and the industry in which we operate;
|
|
|
|
place us at a disadvantage compared to our competitors that have
less indebtedness; and
|
|
|
|
expose us to higher interest expense in the event of increases
in interest rates because indebtedness under our credit facility
bears interest at a variable rate.
|
In addition, we must comply with certain affirmative and
negative covenants under the credit agreement, including
covenants that limit or restrict our ability to, among other
things, merge or consolidate, change our business, and permit
the borrowings to exceed a specified borrowing base, subject to
certain exceptions as set forth in the credit agreement. If we
default under the senior secured credit facility, because of a
covenant breach or otherwise, the outstanding amounts thereunder
could become immediately due and payable.
We may
be subject to future product liability claims that may exceed
the scope and amount of our insurance coverage, which would
expose us to liability for uninsured claims.
While there is a federal preemption defense against product
liability claims for medical products that receive premarket
approval from the FDA, such defense may not be available for
products that we market under a 510(k) clearance. As such, we
are subject to potential product liability claims as a result of
the design, development, manufacture and marketing of our
clinical diagnostic products. Any product liability claim
brought against us, with or without merit, could result in an
increase of our product liability insurance rates. In addition,
our insurance policies have various exclusions, and thus we may
be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no
insurance coverage, in which case we may have to pay the entire
amount of any award. In addition, insurance varies in cost and
can be difficult to obtain, and we may not be able to obtain
insurance in the future on terms acceptable to us, or at all. A
successful product liability claim brought against us in excess
of our insurance coverage, or which our insurance policies do
not cover, may require us to pay substantial amounts, which
could harm our business and results of operations.
We are
exposed to risks associated with acquisitions and other
long-lived and intangible assets that may become impaired and
result in an impairment charge.
As of December 31, 2010, we had approximately
$518.0 million of long-lived assets, including
$14.0 million of capitalized software, net of accumulated
amortization, relating primarily to our TIGRIS and PANTHER
instruments, goodwill of $150.3 million, a
$5.4 million investment in Qualigen, Inc., or Qualigen, a
$5.0 million investment in DiagnoCure, a $0.7 million
investment in Roka, and $181.7 million of capitalized
licenses and manufacturing access fees, patents, purchased
intangible assets and other long-term assets. Additionally, we
had $69.8 million of land and buildings, $23.9 million
of building improvements, $65.3 million of equipment and
furniture and fixtures and $1.9 million in construction in
progress. The substantial majority of our long-lived assets
32
are located in the United States. The carrying amounts of
long-lived and intangible assets are affected whenever events or
changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of
any asset may not be recoverable.
These events or changes might include a significant decline in
market share, a significant decline in profits, rapid changes in
technology, significant litigation, an inability to successfully
deliver an instrument to the marketplace and attain customer
acceptance or other matters. Adverse events or changes in
circumstances may affect the estimated undiscounted future
operating cash flows expected to be derived from long-lived and
intangible assets. If at any time we determine that an
impairment has occurred, we will be required to reflect the
impaired value as a charge, resulting in a reduction in earnings
in the quarter such impairment is identified and a corresponding
reduction in our net asset value. In the past we have incurred,
and in the future we may incur, impairment charges. A material
reduction in earnings resulting from such a charge could cause
us to fail to be profitable in the period in which the charge is
taken or otherwise fail to meet the expectations of investors
and securities analysts, which could cause the price of our
stock to decline.
Future
changes in financial accounting standards or practices, or
existing taxation rules or practices, may cause adverse
unexpected revenue or expense fluctuations and affect our
reported results of operations.
A change in accounting standards or practices, or a change in
existing taxation rules or practices, can have a significant
effect on our reported results and may even affect our reporting
of transactions completed before the change is effective. New
accounting pronouncements and taxation rules and varying
interpretations of accounting pronouncements and taxation
practice have occurred and may occur in the future. Changes to
existing rules or standards, such as the potential requirement
that U.S. registrants prepare financial statements in
accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards, or
the questioning of current practices may adversely affect our
reported financial results or the way we conduct our business.
Our effective tax rate can also be impacted by changes in
estimates of prior years items, past and future levels of
research and development spending, the outcome of audits by
federal, state and foreign jurisdictions and changes in overall
levels of income before tax.
We
expect to continue to incur significant research and development
expenses, which may reduce our profitability.
In recent years, we have incurred significant costs in
connection with the development of blood screening and clinical
diagnostic products, as well as our TIGRIS and PANTHER
instrument systems. We expect our expense levels to remain high
in connection with our research and development as we seek to
expand our product offerings and continue to develop products
and technologies in collaboration with our partners. As a
result, we will need to continue to generate significant
revenues to maintain current levels of profitability. Although
we expect that our research and development expenses as a
percentage of revenue will decrease in future periods, we may
not be able to generate sufficient revenues to maintain current
levels of profitability in the future. A potential reduction of
profitability in the future could cause the market price of our
common stock to decline.
Our
marketable securities are subject to market and investment risks
which may result in a loss of value.
We engage one or more third parties to manage some of our cash
consistent with an investment policy that restricts investments
to debt securities of high credit quality, with requirements
placed on maturities and concentration by security type and
issue. These investments are intended to preserve principal
while providing liquidity adequate to meet our projected cash
requirements. Risk of principal loss is intended to be minimized
through diversified short and medium term investments of high
quality, but these investments are not, in every case,
guaranteed or fully insured. In light of recent changes in the
credit market, some high quality short term investment
securities, similar to the types of securities that we invest
in, have suffered illiquidity, events of default or
deterioration in credit quality. If our short term investment
portfolio becomes affected by any of the foregoing or other
adverse events, we may incur losses relating to these
investments. In addition, the Pacific Biosciences common stock
we hold, which trades on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under
the symbol PACB, is also subject to various market
and investment risks. We may lose all or a portion of the value
of our investment in Pacific Biosciences as a result of a
decline in the value of Pacific Biosciences common stock.
33
We may
not have financing for future capital requirements, which may
prevent us from addressing gaps in our product offerings or
improving our technology.
Although historically our cash flow from operations has been
sufficient to satisfy working capital and capital expenditure
and research and development requirements, we may in the future
need to incur debt or issue equity in order to fund these
requirements, as well as to make acquisitions and other
investments. If we cannot obtain debt or equity financing on
acceptable terms or are limited with respect to incurring debt
or issuing equity, we may be unable to address gaps in our
product offerings or improve our technology, particularly
through acquisitions or investments.
If we raise funds through the issuance of debt or equity, any
debt securities or preferred stock issued will have rights,
preferences and privileges senior to those of holders of our
common stock in the event of a liquidation and may contain other
provisions that adversely affect the rights of the holders of
our common stock. The terms of any debt securities may impose
restrictions on our operations. If we raise funds through the
issuance of equity or debt convertible into equity, such
financing would result in dilution to our stockholders.
If we
or our contract manufacturers are unable to manufacture our
products in sufficient quantities, on a timely basis, at
acceptable costs and in compliance with regulatory requirements,
our ability to sell our products will be harmed.
Our products must be manufactured in sufficient quantities and
on a timely basis, while maintaining product quality and
acceptable manufacturing costs and complying with regulatory
requirements. In determining the required quantities of our
products and the manufacturing schedule, we must make
significant judgments and estimates based on historical
experience, inventory levels, current market trends and other
related factors. Because of the inherent nature of estimates,
there could be significant differences between our estimates and
the actual amounts of products we and our distributors require,
which could harm our business and results of operations.
Significant additional work will be required for
scaling-up
manufacturing of each new product prior to commercialization,
and we may not successfully complete this work. Manufacturing
and quality control problems have arisen and may arise in the
future as we attempt to
scale-up our
manufacturing of a new product, and we may not achieve
scale-up in
a timely manner, at a commercially reasonable cost or at all. In
addition, although we expect some of our newer products and
products under development to share production attributes with
certain of our existing products, production of these newer
products may require the development of new manufacturing
technologies and expertise. We may be unable to develop the
required technologies or expertise.
The amplified NAT tests that we produce are significantly more
expensive to manufacture than our
non-amplified
products. As we continue to develop new amplified NAT tests in
response to market demands for greater sensitivity, our product
costs will increase significantly and our margins may decline.
We sell our products in a number of cost-sensitive market
categories, and we may not be able to manufacture these more
complex amplified tests at costs that would allow us to maintain
our historical gross margin percentages. In addition, new
products that detect or quantify more than one target organism
will contain significantly more complex reagents, which will
increase the cost of our manufacturing processes and quality
control testing. We or other parties we engage to help us may
not be able to manufacture these products at a cost or in
quantities that would make these products commercially viable.
If we are unable to develop or contract for manufacturing
capabilities on acceptable terms for our products under
development, we will not be able to conduct pre-clinical,
clinical and validation testing on these product candidates,
which will prevent or delay regulatory clearance or approval of
these product candidates.
Blood screening and clinical diagnostic products are regulated
by the FDA as well as other foreign medical regulatory bodies.
In some cases, such as in the United States and the EU, certain
products may also require individual lot release testing.
Maintaining compliance with multiple regulators, and multiple
centers within the FDA, adds complexity and cost to our overall
manufacturing processes. In addition, our manufacturing
facilities and those of our contract manufacturers are subject
to periodic regulatory inspections by the FDA and other federal
and state regulatory agencies, and these facilities are subject
to FDA requirements relating to the Quality System Regulation.
We or our contractors may fail to satisfy these regulatory
requirements in the future, and any failure to do so may prevent
us from selling our products.
34
Our
sales to international markets are subject to additional
risks.
Sales of our products outside the United States accounted for
27% and 26% of our total revenues for 2010 and 2009,
respectively. Sales by Novartis of collaboration blood screening
products outside of the United States accounted for 58% and 60%
of our total international revenues for 2010 and 2009,
respectively.
We encounter risks inherent in international operations. We
expect a significant portion of our sales growth to come from
expansion in international markets. If the value of the
U.S. dollar increases relative to foreign currencies, our
products could become less competitive in international markets.
In addition, our international sales have increased as a result
of our acquisition of Tepnel and other international expansion
efforts. Our international sales also may be limited or
disrupted by:
|
|
|
|
|
the imposition of government controls;
|
|
|
|
export license requirements;
|
|
|
|
economic and political instability;
|
|
|
|
price controls;
|
|
|
|
trade restrictions and tariffs;
|
|
|
|
differing local product preferences and product
requirements; and
|
|
|
|
changes in foreign medical reimbursement and coverage policies
and programs.
|
In addition, we anticipate that requirements for smaller pool
sizes of blood samples will result in lower gross margin
percentages, as additional tests are required to deliver the
sample results. We have already observed this trend with respect
to certain sales in international markets. In general,
international pool sizes are smaller than domestic pool sizes
and, therefore, growth in blood screening revenues attributed to
international expansion has led and we expect that it will
continue to lead to lower gross margin percentages.
If
third-party payors do not reimburse our customers for the use of
our clinical diagnostic products or if they reduce reimbursement
levels, our ability to sell our products will be
harmed.
We sell our clinical diagnostic products primarily to large
reference laboratories, public health institutions and
hospitals, substantially all of which receive reimbursement for
the health care services they provide to their patients from
third-party payors, such as Medicare, Medicaid and other
government programs, private insurance plans and managed care
programs. Most of these third-party payors may deny
reimbursement if they determine that a medical product was not
used in accordance with cost-effective treatment methods, as
determined by the third-party payor, or was used for an
unapproved indication. Third-party payors may also refuse to
reimburse for experimental procedures and devices. In addition,
foreign medical reimbursement rules are not always consistent
with U.S. approaches and often differ from country to
country, which complicates the process of introducing new
products in foreign jurisdictions.
Third-party payors reimbursement policies may affect sales
of our products that screen for more than one pathogen at the
same time, such as our APTIMA Combo 2 product for screening for
the causative agents of chlamydial infections and gonorrhea in
the same sample. Third-party payors may choose to reimburse our
customers on a per test basis, rather than on the basis of the
number of results given by the test. This may result in our
customers electing to use separate tests to screen for each
disease so that they can receive reimbursement for each test
they conduct. In that event, these entities likely would
purchase separate tests for each disease, rather than products
that test for more than one microorganism.
In addition, third-party payors are increasingly attempting to
contain health care costs by limiting both coverage and the
level of reimbursement for medical products and services. Levels
of reimbursement may decrease in the future, and future
legislation, regulation or reimbursement policies of third-party
payors may adversely affect the demand for and price levels of
our products. If our customers are not reimbursed for our
products, they may reduce or discontinue purchases of our
products, which would cause our revenues to decline.
35
We are
dependent on technologies we license, and if we fail to maintain
our licenses or license new technologies and rights to
particular nucleic acid sequences for targeted diseases in the
future, we may be limited in our ability to develop new
products.
We are dependent on licenses from third parties for some of our
key technologies. For example, our patented TMA technology is
based on technology we have licensed from Stanford University.
We enter into new licensing arrangements in the ordinary course
of business to expand our product portfolio and access new
technologies to enhance our products and develop new products.
Many of these licenses provide us with exclusive rights to the
subject technology or disease marker. If our license with
respect to any of these technologies or markers is terminated
for any reason, we may not be able to sell products that
incorporate the technology. In addition, we may lose competitive
advantages if we fail to maintain exclusivity under an exclusive
license.
Our ability to develop additional diagnostic tests for diseases
may depend on the ability of third parties to discover
particular sequences or markers and correlate them with disease,
as well as the rate at which such discoveries are made. Our
ability to design products that target these diseases may depend
on our ability to obtain the necessary rights from the third
parties that make any of these discoveries. In addition, there
are a finite number of diseases and conditions for which our NAT
assays may be economically viable. If we are unable to access
new technologies or the rights to particular sequences or
markers necessary for additional diagnostic products on
commercially reasonable terms, we may be limited in our ability
to develop new diagnostic products.
Our products and manufacturing processes require access to
technologies and materials that may be subject to patents or
other intellectual property rights held by third parties. We may
discover that we need to obtain additional intellectual property
rights in order to commercialize our products. We may be unable
to obtain such rights on commercially reasonable terms or at
all, which could adversely affect our ability to grow our
business.
If we
fail to attract, hire and retain qualified personnel, we may not
be able to design, develop, market or sell our products or
successfully manage our business.
Competition for top management personnel is intense and we may
not be able to recruit and retain the personnel we need. The
loss of any one of our management personnel or our inability to
identify, attract, retain and integrate additional qualified
management personnel could make it difficult for us to manage
our business successfully, attract new customers, retain
existing customers and pursue our strategic objectives. Although
we have employment agreements with our executive officers, we
may be unable to retain our existing management. We do not
maintain key person life insurance for any of our executive
officers.
Competition for skilled sales, marketing, research, product
development, engineering, and technical personnel is intense and
we may not be able to recruit and retain the personnel we need.
The loss of the services of key personnel, or our inability to
hire new personnel with the requisite skills, could restrict our
ability to develop new products or enhance existing products in
a timely manner, sell products to our customers or manage our
business effectively.
If a
natural or man-made disaster strikes our manufacturing
facilities, we will be unable to manufacture our products for a
substantial amount of time and our sales will
decline.
We manufacture substantially all of our products in five
manufacturing facilities, two of which are located in
San Diego, California, two of which are located in
Waukesha, Wisconsin and the other is located in Stamford,
Connecticut. These facilities and the manufacturing equipment we
use would be costly to replace and could require substantial
lead time to repair or replace. Our facilities may be harmed by
natural or man-made disasters, including, without limitation,
earthquakes, tornadoes and fires, and in the event they are
affected by a disaster, we would be forced to rely on
third-party manufacturers. The wildfires in San Diego in
October 2007 required that we temporarily shut down our facility
for the manufacture of blood screening products. In the event of
a disaster, we may lose customers and we may be unable to regain
those customers thereafter. Although we possess insurance for
damage to our property and the disruption of our business from
casualties, this insurance may not be sufficient to cover all of
our potential losses and may not continue to be available to us
on acceptable terms, or at all.
36
In addition, we may also suffer disruptions in our ability to
ship products to customers or otherwise operate our business as
a result of other natural disasters, such as the eruptions of a
volcano in Iceland which necessitated the closing of a
significant portion of the airspace over Europe for several days
and caused the cancellation of thousands of airline flights
during April 2010. Further eruptions by this Icelandic volcano
or the occurrence of other natural disasters having a similar
effect could harm our business and results of operations.
If we
use biological and hazardous materials in a manner that causes
injury or violates laws, we may be liable for
damages.
Our research and development activities and our manufacturing
activities involve the controlled use of infectious agents,
potentially harmful biological materials, as well as hazardous
materials, chemicals and various radioactive compounds. We
cannot completely eliminate the risk of accidental contamination
or injury, and we could be held liable for damages that result
from any contamination or injury. In addition, we are subject to
federal, state and local laws and regulations governing the use,
storage, handling and disposal of these materials and specified
waste products. The damages resulting from any accidental
contamination and the cost of compliance with environmental laws
and regulations could be significant.
The
anti-takeover provisions of our certificate of incorporation and
bylaws, and provisions of Delaware law, could delay or prevent a
change of control that our stockholders may favor.
Provisions of our amended and restated certificate of
incorporation and amended and restated bylaws may discourage,
delay or prevent a merger or other change of control that our
stockholders may consider favorable or may impede the ability of
the holders of our common stock to change our management. The
provisions of our amended and restated certificate of
incorporation and amended and restated bylaws, among other
things:
|
|
|
|
|
divide our board of directors into three classes, with members
of each class to be elected for staggered three-year terms;
|
|
|
|
limit the right of stockholders to remove directors;
|
|
|
|
regulate how stockholders may present proposals or nominate
directors for election at annual meetings of
stockholders; and
|
|
|
|
authorize our board of directors to issue preferred stock in one
or more series, without stockholder approval.
|
In addition, because we have not chosen to be exempt from
Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, this
provision could also delay or prevent a change of control that
our stockholders may favor. Section 203 provides that,
subject to limited exceptions, persons that acquire, or are
affiliated with a person that acquires, more than
15 percent of the outstanding voting stock of a Delaware
corporation shall not engage in any business combination with
that corporation, including by merger, consolidation or
acquisitions of additional shares, for a three-year period
following the date on which that person or its affiliate crosses
the 15 percent stock ownership threshold.
If we
do not effectively manage our growth, it could affect our
ability to pursue opportunities and expand our
business.
Growth in our business, including as a result of acquisitions,
has placed and may continue to place a significant strain on our
personnel, facilities, management systems and resources. We will
need to continue to improve our operational and financial
systems and managerial controls and procedures and train and
manage our workforce. In addition, we will have to maintain
close coordination among our various departments and locations.
If we fail to effectively manage our growth, it could adversely
affect our ability to pursue business opportunities and expand
our business.
37
Information
technology systems implementation issues or security threats
could disrupt our internal operations and adversely affect our
financial results.
Portions of our information technology infrastructure may
experience interruptions, delays or cessations of service or
produce errors in connection with ongoing systems implementation
work. In particular, we have implemented an enterprise resource
planning software system to replace our various legacy systems.
To more fully realize the potential of this system, we are
continually reassessing and upgrading processes and this may be
more expensive, time consuming and resource intensive than
planned. Any disruptions that may occur in the operation of this
system or any future systems or any unauthorized access to our
information systems could increase our expenses and adversely
affect our ability to report in an accurate and timely manner
the results of our consolidated operations, our financial
position and cash flow and to otherwise operate our business in
a secure environment, all of which could adversely affect our
financial results, stock price and reputation.
Compliance
with changing corporate governance and public disclosure
regulations may result in additional expenses.
Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate
governance and public disclosure, including the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, new SEC regulations and Nasdaq Global Select
Market rules, are creating uncertainty for companies such as
ours. To maintain high standards of corporate governance and
public disclosure, we have invested, and intend to continue to
invest, in reasonably necessary resources to comply with
evolving standards. These investments have resulted in increased
general and administrative expenses and a diversion of
management time and attention from revenue-generating activities
and may continue to do so in the future.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
Our worldwide headquarters are located in our two adjacent
facilities located on Genetic Center Drive in San Diego,
California. We own each of the facilities and the underlying
land. The first facility is 262,000 square feet. The second
facility consists of a 291,000 square foot shell, with
approximately 219,000 square feet built-out. The remaining
expansion space can be used to accommodate future growth.
In February 2008, we completed the purchase of the facility
where we manufacture our blood screening products. We had
previously leased this facility, which consists of approximately
94,000 square feet, located in San Diego, California,
since November 1997. The purchase price was $15.7 million.
We also lease a 37,000 square foot facility in Stamford,
Connecticut, which functions as the base of our HLA testing
products business that we acquired in connection with our
acquisition of Tepnel in April 2009. The lease currently runs
through April 2015.
In the United Kingdom, we own a 23,000 square foot facility
in Cardiff and a 20,000 square foot facility in Livingston,
as well as lease space in Abingdon and Manchester. During the
second quarter of 2010, we initiated a plan to consolidate our
operations in the United Kingdom to Manchester and Livingston in
order to accommodate the anticipated growth in the business and
to optimize expenses. In connection with this consolidation we
entered into a new lease covering our facility in Manchester,
which increased the size of the leased space to approximately
57,000 square feet. The lease for the Manchester facility
is a 25 year lease which runs through August 2035.
Additionally, we lease space in the following locations: Aachen,
Germany; Antwerp, Belgium; Besancon, France; Tokyo, Japan;
Waukesha, Wisconsin; and Wiesbaden, Germany.
38
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
We are a party to the following litigation and may also be
involved in other litigation arising in the ordinary course of
business from time to time. We intend to vigorously defend our
interests in these matters. We expect that the resolution of
these matters will not have a material adverse effect on our
business, financial condition or results of operations. However,
due to the uncertainties inherent in litigation, no assurance
can be given as to the outcome of these proceedings.
Digene
Corporation
In December 2006, Digene filed a demand for binding arbitration
against Roche with the ICDR of the American Arbitration
Association that asserted, among other things, that Roche
materially breached a cross-license agreement between Roche and
Digene by granting us an improper sublicense and sought a
determination that a supply and purchase agreement between Roche
and us was null and void. Under the supply and purchase
agreement, Roche manufactures and supplies us with
oligonucleotides for HPV, which we use in our molecular
diagnostic assays. In July 2007, the ICDR arbitrators granted
our petition to join the arbitration. In April 2009, following
the arbitration hearing, a three-member arbitration panel from
the ICDR issued an interim award rejecting all claims asserted
by Digene (now Qiagen Gaithersburg, Inc.). In August 2009, the
arbitrators issued their final arbitration award, which
confirmed the interim award and also granted our motion to
recover attorneys fees and costs from Digene in the amount
of approximately $2.9 million. We filed a petition to
confirm the arbitration award in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of New York and Digene filed a
petition to vacate or modify the award. In August 2010, the
court confirmed the arbitration award and we received the
$2.9 million from Digene, which was recorded as an offset
to general and administrative expense.
Becton,
Dickinson and Company
In October 2009, we filed a patent infringement action against
BD in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
California. The complaint alleges that BDs
Vipertm
XTRtm
testing system infringes five of our U.S. patents covering
automated processes for preparing, amplifying and detecting
nucleic acid targets. The complaint also alleges that BDs
ProbeTectm
Female Endocervical and Male Urethral Specimen Collection Kits
for Amplified Chlamydia trachomatis/Neisseria gonorrhoeae
(CT/GC) DNA assays used with the Viper XTR testing system
infringe two of our U.S. patents covering penetrable caps
for specimen collection tubes. Finally, the complaint alleges
that BD has infringed our U.S. patent on methods and kits
for destroying the ability of a nucleic acid to be amplified;
however, we have moved to dismiss this specific claim from the
lawsuit, while maintaining all other claims. The complaint seeks
monetary damages and injunctive relief. In March 2010, we filed
a second complaint for patent infringement against BD in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
alleging that BDs BD MAX
Systemtm
(formerly known as the HandyLab Jaguar system) infringes four of
our U.S. patents covering automated processes for
preparing, amplifying and detecting nucleic acid targets. The
second complaint also seeks monetary damages and injunctive
relief. In June 2010, these two actions were consolidated into a
single legal proceeding. There can be no assurances as to the
final outcome of this litigation.
|
|
Item 4.
|
(Removed
and Reserved).
|
39
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Market
Information
Our common stock has been traded on The Nasdaq Global Select
Market since September 16, 2002 under the symbol GPRO.
Prior to that time, there was no public market for our common
stock. The following table sets forth the high and low sale
prices for our common stock as reported on The Nasdaq Global
Select Market for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
50.21
|
|
|
$
|
42.19
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
$
|
51.33
|
|
|
$
|
42.60
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
$
|
49.52
|
|
|
$
|
42.00
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
$
|
59.75
|
|
|
$
|
46.95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
First Quarter
|
|
$
|
47.11
|
|
|
$
|
37.50
|
|
Second Quarter
|
|
$
|
49.29
|
|
|
$
|
40.66
|
|
Third Quarter
|
|
$
|
43.63
|
|
|
$
|
35.70
|
|
Fourth Quarter
|
|
$
|
45.24
|
|
|
$
|
40.50
|
|
As of February 18, 2011, there were 5,906 stockholders of
record of our common stock. We have not paid any cash dividends
to date and do not anticipate any being paid in the foreseeable
future.
Issuer
Purchases of Equity Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number
|
|
|
Approximate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
Dollar Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased as
|
|
|
of Shares
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part of
|
|
|
that May Yet
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
Publicly
|
|
|
Be Purchased
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Announced
|
|
|
Under the
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price Paid
|
|
|
Plans or
|
|
|
Plans or
|
|
|
|
Purchased
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
Programs
|
|
|
Programs
|
|
|
October 1-31, 2010
|
|
|
178,500
|
|
|
$
|
48.03
|
|
|
|
178,500
|
|
|
$
|
3,346,955
|
|
November 1-30, 2010
|
|
|
66,701
|
|
|
|
49.20
|
|
|
|
66,701
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 1-31, 2010
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
53.75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total(1)(2)
|
|
|
245,284
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
245,201
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
In February 2010, our Board of Directors authorized the
repurchase of up to $100.0 million of our common stock
until December 31, 2010, through negotiated or open market
transactions. There was no minimum or maximum number of shares
to be repurchased under the program. During the fourth quarter
of 2010, we completed the program by repurchasing
245,201 shares at an average price of $48.35 per share.
From inception of the program, we repurchased a total of
2,165,201 shares at an average price of $46.16 per share,
or approximately $99.9 million. |
|
(2) |
|
The difference between the total number of shares purchased and
the total number of shares purchased as part of publicly
announced plans or programs is due to the shares of common stock
withheld by us for the payment of taxes upon vesting of certain
employees restricted stock. During the fourth quarter of
2010, we repurchased and retired 83 shares of our common
stock, at an average price of $53.75, withheld by us to satisfy
employee tax obligations upon vesting of restricted stock
granted under our 2003 Incentive Award Plan. We may make similar
repurchases in the future to satisfy employee tax obligations
upon vesting of restricted stock. We had an aggregate of
approximately 97,000 shares of restricted stock,
24,000 shares of deferred issuance restricted stock awards
and 65,000 performance stock awards outstanding as of
December 31, 2010. |
40
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
SELECTED
FINANCIAL INFORMATION
The selected financial data set forth below with respect to our
consolidated statements of income for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2010 and with respect to our
consolidated balance sheets, at December 31, 2010 and 2009
are derived from our consolidated financial statements that have
been audited by Ernst & Young LLP, independent
registered public accounting firm, which are included elsewhere
in this report. The statement of income data for the years ended
December 31, 2007 and 2006 and the balance sheet data as of
December 31, 2008, 2007, and 2006 are derived from our
audited consolidated financial statements that are not included
in this report. The selected financial information set forth
below should be read in conjunction with Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations and our consolidated financial statements and
related notes appearing elsewhere in this report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
Statement of income data for the years ended December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
522,709
|
|
|
$
|
483,759
|
|
|
$
|
429,220
|
|
|
$
|
370,877
|
|
|
$
|
325,307
|
|
Collaborative research revenue
|
|
|
14,518
|
|
|
|
7,911
|
|
|
|
20,581
|
|
|
|
16,619
|
|
|
|
15,937
|
|
Royalty and license revenue
|
|
|
6,100
|
|
|
|
6,632
|
|
|
|
22,894
|
|
|
|
15,518
|
|
|
|
13,520
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
543,327
|
|
|
|
498,302
|
|
|
|
472,695
|
|
|
|
403,014
|
|
|
|
354,764
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales
|
|
|
169,222
|
|
|
|
152,393
|
|
|
|
128,029
|
|
|
|
119,641
|
|
|
|
103,882
|
|
Acquisition-related intangible amortization
|
|
|
8,847
|
|
|
|
4,144
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
111,103
|
|
|
|
105,970
|
|
|
|
101,099
|
|
|
|
97,144
|
|
|
|
84,545
|
|
Marketing and sales
|
|
|
59,492
|
|
|
|
53,853
|
|
|
|
45,850
|
|
|
|
39,928
|
|
|
|
37,096
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
56,818
|
|
|
|
61,828
|
|
|
|
52,322
|
|
|
|
47,007
|
|
|
|
44,936
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
405,482
|
|
|
|
378,188
|
|
|
|
327,300
|
|
|
|
303,720
|
|
|
|
270,459
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
137,845
|
|
|
|
120,114
|
|
|
|
145,395
|
|
|
|
99,294
|
|
|
|
84,305
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
106,937
|
|
|
$
|
91,783
|
|
|
$
|
106,954
|
|
|
$
|
86,140
|
|
|
$
|
59,498
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
2.20
|
|
|
$
|
1.82
|
|
|
$
|
1.98
|
|
|
$
|
1.62
|
|
|
$
|
1.15
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
2.18
|
|
|
$
|
1.79
|
|
|
$
|
1.95
|
|
|
$
|
1.58
|
|
|
$
|
1.12
|
|
Weighted average shares
outstanding(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
48,560
|
|
|
|
50,356
|
|
|
|
53,740
|
|
|
|
52,860
|
|
|
|
51,637
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
49,033
|
|
|
|
50,965
|
|
|
|
54,785
|
|
|
|
54,355
|
|
|
|
53,200
|
|
Balance sheet data as of December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and current marketable
securities(2)
|
|
$
|
230,338
|
|
|
$
|
485,606
|
|
|
$
|
431,398
|
|
|
$
|
395,417
|
|
|
$
|
159,406
|
|
Working
capital(2)
|
|
|
93,259
|
|
|
|
333,560
|
|
|
|
506,457
|
|
|
|
480,321
|
|
|
|
211,555
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
1,167,797
|
|
|
|
1,128,185
|
|
|
|
869,531
|
|
|
|
789,053
|
|
|
|
623,839
|
|
Long-term obligations
|
|
|
6,654
|
|
|
|
16,215
|
|
|
|
2,162
|
|
|
|
1,893
|
|
|
|
1,211
|
|
Stockholders
equity(3)
|
|
|
823,379
|
|
|
|
767,175
|
|
|
|
813,760
|
|
|
|
738,040
|
|
|
|
570,208
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Effective January 1, 2009, we adopted FASB guidance which
addresses whether instruments granted in share-based payment
transactions are participating securities and therefore have a
potentially dilutive effect on earnings per share. This guidance
was applied retroactively to all periods presented. The impact
on previously reported earnings per share was not material. |
|
(2) |
|
In 2009, we began reporting investments that are in an
unrealized loss position deemed to be temporary with a
contractual maturity of greater than 12 months as
non-current marketable securities. Our working capital at
December 31, 2010 decreased $240.3 million from
December 31, 2009. This decline in working capital resulted |
41
|
|
|
|
|
from a $243.8 million increase in our non-current
marketable securities from December 31, 2009 to
December 31, 2010. Additionally, prior year amounts have
been reclassified to conform to the current year presentation. |
|
(3) |
|
Effective January 1, 2007, we reduced beginning retained
earnings by approximately $1.0 million due to adoption of
FASB guidance on accounting for uncertainty in income taxes. |
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
Overview
We are a global leader in the development, manufacture and
marketing of rapid, accurate and cost-effective molecular
diagnostic products and services that are used primarily to
diagnose human diseases, screen donated human blood, and ensure
transplant compatibility. Our molecular diagnostic products are
designed to detect diseases more rapidly
and/or
accurately than older tests, and are among the fastest-growing
categories of the IVD industry.
We market a broad portfolio of NATs to detect infectious
microorganisms, including those causing STDs, tuberculosis,
strep throat and other infections. Our leading clinical
diagnostics products include our APTIMA family of assays that
are used to detect the common STDs chlamydia and gonorrhea.
In 2009 and 2010, we expanded our portfolio of products with
acquisitions focused on transplant-related and respiratory
diagnostics. Our transplant diagnostics business, which we
obtained as part of our acquisition of Tepnel in April 2009,
offers diagnostics to help determine the compatibility between
donors and recipients in tissue and organ transplants. Our
acquisition of Prodesse added a portfolio of real-time PCR
products for detecting influenza and other infectious organisms.
In addition, in December 2010, we acquired GTI Diagnostics, a
manufacturer of certain of our transplant diagnostic products,
in addition to specialty coagulation and transfusion-related
blood bank products.
In blood screening, we developed and manufacture the PROCLEIX
assays, which are used to detect HIV-1, HBV, HCV, and WNV in
donated human blood. Our blood screening products are marketed
worldwide by Novartis under Novartis trademarks. We were
awarded the 2004 National Medal of Technology, the nations
highest honor for technological innovation, in recognition of
our pioneering work in developing NAT testing systems to
safeguard the nations blood supply.
Several of our current and future molecular tests can be
performed on our TIGRIS instrument, a fully automated,
high-throughput NAT system for diagnostics and blood screening.
We are building on the success of our TIGRIS instrument system
by developing and commercializing our next-generation PANTHER
instrument, which is designed to be a versatile, fully automated
NAT system for low- to mid-volume laboratories. The PANTHER
instrument was CE-marked and launched in Europe in the fourth
quarter of 2010.
Our development pipeline includes products to detect:
|
|
|
|
|
HPV, which causes cervical cancer;
|
|
|
|
gene-based markers for prostate cancer;
|
|
|
|
Trichomonas, a common parasite that causes a highly prevalent
STD;
|
|
|
|
certain respiratory infections;
|
|
|
|
antigens and antibodies that are used to determine transplant
and transfusion compatibility; and
|
|
|
|
specialty coagulation products.
|
Recent
Events
Financial
Results
Product sales for 2010 were $522.7 million, compared to
$483.8 million in 2009, an increase of 8%. Total revenues
for 2010 were $543.3 million, compared to
$498.3 million in 2009, an increase of 9%. Net income for
42
2010 was $106.9 million ($2.18 per diluted share), compared
to $91.8 million ($1.79 per diluted share) in 2009, an
increase of 16%.
Our total revenues, net income and fully diluted earnings per
share during 2010 included the results of operations of both
Tepnel and Prodesse, as well as the operations of GTI
Diagnostics from the date of acquisition in December 2010. In
contrast, our total revenues, net income and fully diluted
earnings per share during 2009 only included the results of
operations of Tepnel and Prodesse from their respective dates of
acquisition in April 2009 and October 2009, as well as
$8.2 million of additional one-time revenue associated with
the renegotiation of our collaboration agreement with Novartis,
which we recognized in the first quarter of 2009.
Collaboration
with and Investment in Pacific Biosciences of California,
Inc.
In June 2010, we entered into a collaboration agreement with
Pacific Biosciences regarding the research and development of
instruments integrating our sample preparation technologies and
Pacific Biosciences single-molecule DNA sequencing
technologies for use in clinical diagnostics. Subject to
customary termination rights, the initial term of the
collaboration will end on the earlier of December 15, 2012
or six months after Pacific Biosciences demonstrates the proof
of concept of its V2 single-molecule DNA sequencing
system. Concurrently with the execution of the collaboration
agreement, we also purchased $50.0 million of Pacific
Biosciences Series F preferred stock, as a
participant in Pacific Biosciences Series F preferred
stock round of financing that raised a total of approximately
$109.0 million. In October 2010, Pacific Biosciences
completed an initial public offering of its common stock. As a
result of the initial public offering, our preferred stock was
converted into common stock.
Acquisition
of GTI Diagnostics
In December 2010, we acquired GTI Diagnostics for approximately
$53.0 million on a net-cash basis. Our acquisition of GTI
Diagnostics has broadened and strengthened our transplant
diagnostics business, and has also provided us access to new
products in the specialty coagulation and transfusion-related
blood bank markets.
Stock
Repurchase Program
In February 2010, our Board of Directors authorized the
repurchase of up to $100.0 million of our common stock
until December 31, 2010, through negotiated or open market
transactions. There was no minimum or maximum number of shares
to be repurchased under the program. During 2010, we repurchased
and retired approximately 2,165,000 shares under this
program at an average price of $46.16 per share, or
approximately $99.9 million in total, thereby completing
the program.
Critical
accounting policies and estimates
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and
results of operations is based on our consolidated financial
statements, which have been prepared in accordance with United
States generally accepted accounting principles, or
U.S. GAAP. The preparation of these consolidated financial
statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that
affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and
expenses and the related disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates,
including those related to revenue recognition, the
collectability of accounts receivable, valuation of inventories
and long-lived assets, including license and manufacturing
access fees, patent costs and capitalized software, equity
investments in publicly and privately held companies, accrued
liabilities, income tax and the valuation of stock-based
compensation. We base our estimates on historical experience and
on various other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable
under the circumstances, which form the basis for making
judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities.
Senior management has discussed the development, selection and
disclosure of these estimates with the Audit Committee of our
Board of Directors. Actual results may differ from these
estimates.
The following critical accounting policies affect the
significant judgments and estimates used in the preparation of
our consolidated financial statements.
43
Revenue
recognition
We record shipments of our clinical diagnostic products as
product sales when the product is shipped and title and risk of
loss has passed and when collection of the resulting receivable
is reasonably assured.
We manufacture blood screening products according to demand
schedules provided by Novartis. Upon shipment to Novartis, we
recognize blood screening product sales at an agreed upon
transfer price and record the related cost of products sold.
Based on the terms of our collaboration agreement with Novartis,
our ultimate share of the net revenue from sales to the end user
is not known until reported to us by Novartis. We then adjust
blood screening product sales upon receipt of customer revenue
reports and a net payment from Novartis of amounts reflecting
our ultimate share of net sales by Novartis for these products,
less the transfer price revenues previously recognized. We
amended our agreement with Novartis effective as of
January 1, 2009 to decrease the time period between product
sales and net payment of our share of blood screening assay
revenue from 45 days to 30 days.
Generally, we provide our instrumentation to reference
laboratories, public health institutions and hospitals without
requiring them to purchase the equipment or enter into an
equipment lease. Instead, we recover the cost of providing the
instrumentation in the amount we charge for our diagnostic
assays. The depreciation costs associated with an instrument are
charged to cost of product sales on a straight-line basis over
the estimated life of the instrument. The costs to maintain
these instruments in the field are charged to cost of product
sales as incurred.
We sell our instruments to Novartis for use in blood screening
and record these instrument sales upon delivery since Novartis
is responsible for the placement, maintenance and repair of the
units with its customers. We also sell instruments to our
clinical diagnostics customers and record sales of these
instruments upon delivery and receipt of customer acceptance.
Prior to delivery, each instrument is tested to meet
Gen-Probes and FDA specifications, and is shipped fully
assembled. Customer acceptance of our clinical diagnostic
instrument systems requires installation and training by our
technical service personnel. Installation is a standard process
consisting principally of uncrating, calibrating, and testing
the instrumentation.
We record revenue on our research product sales upon delivery of
the goods and on our research services in the period during
which the related costs are incurred, or services are provided.
These revenues consist of outsourcing services for
pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and healthcare industries,
including nucleic acid purification and analysis services, as
well as the sale of monoclonal antibodies.
We analyze each element of our collaborative arrangements to
determine the appropriate revenue recognition. We recognize
revenue on up-front payments over the period of significant
involvement under the related agreements unless the fee is in
exchange for products delivered or services rendered that
represent the culmination of a separate earnings process and no
further performance obligation exists under the contract.
According to FASB guidance, revenue arrangements with multiple
deliverables are divided into separate units of accounting if
(i) the delivered item has stand-alone value, (ii) the
vendor has objective and reliable evidence of fair value of the
undelivered item(s), and (iii) the customer has a general
right of return relative to the delivered item and delivery or
performance of the undelivered item(s) is probable and
substantially within the vendors control. All of these
criteria must be met in order for a delivered item to be
accounted for as a separate unit.
We recognize collaborative research revenue over the term of
various collaboration agreements, as negotiated monthly
contracted amounts are earned or reimbursable costs are incurred
related to those agreements. Negotiated monthly contracted
amounts are earned in relative proportion to the performance
required under the applicable contracts. Non-refundable license
fees are recognized over the related performance period or at
the time that we have satisfied all performance obligations.
Milestone payments are recognized as revenue upon the
achievement of specified milestones when (i) we have earned
the milestone payment, (ii) the milestone is substantive in
nature and the achievement of the milestone is not reasonably
assured at the inception of the agreement, (iii) the fees
are non-refundable, and (iv) performance obligations after
the milestone achievement will continue to be funded by the
collaborator at a level comparable to the level before the
milestone achievement. Any amounts received prior to satisfying
our revenue recognition criteria are recorded as deferred
revenue on the consolidated balance sheets.
Royalty revenue is recognized related to the sale or use of our
products or technologies under license agreements with third
parties. For those arrangements where royalties are reasonably
estimable, we recognize revenue based on estimates of royalties
earned during the applicable period and adjust for differences
between the
44
estimated and actual royalties in the following period.
Historically, these adjustments have not been material. For
those arrangements where royalties are not reasonably estimable,
we recognize revenue upon receipt of royalty statements from the
applicable licensee.
Income
taxes
Our income tax returns are based on calculations and assumptions
that are subject to examination by various tax authorities.
While we believe we have appropriate support for the positions
taken on our tax returns, we regularly assess the potential
outcomes of these examinations and any future examinations in
determining the adequacy of our provision for income taxes. As
part of our assessment of potential adjustments to our tax
returns, we increase our current tax liability to the extent an
adjustment would result in a cash tax payment or decrease our
deferred tax assets to the extent an adjustment would not result
in a cash tax payment. We review, at least quarterly, the
likelihood and amount of potential adjustments and adjust the
income tax provision, the current tax liability and deferred
taxes in the period in which the facts that give rise to a
revision become probable and estimable. Although we believe that
the estimates and assumptions supporting our assessments are
reasonable, adjustments could be materially different from those
that are reflected in historical income tax provisions and
recorded assets and liabilities.
We regularly review our deferred tax assets for recoverability
and establish a valuation allowance based on historical taxable
income, projected future taxable income, the expected timing of
the reversals of existing temporary differences and the
implementation of tax-planning strategies.
Stock-based
compensation
Stock-based compensation cost is measured at the grant date,
based on the estimated fair value of the award, and is
recognized as expense over the employees requisite service
period. Stock-based compensation expense is recognized based on
the value of share-based payment awards that are ultimately
expected to vest, which coincides with the award holders
requisite service period. Certain of these costs are capitalized
into inventory on our consolidated balance sheets, and are
recognized as an expense when the related products are sold.
Marketable
securities
The primary objectives of our marketable debt security
investment portfolio are liquidity and safety of principal.
Investments are made with the goal of achieving the highest rate
of return consistent with these two objectives. Our investment
policy limits investments to certain types of debt and money
market instruments issued by institutions primarily with
investment grade credit ratings and places restrictions on
maturities and concentration by type and issuer.
Marketable debt and equity securities are carried at fair value,
with unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, reported as a
separate component of stockholders equity under the
caption Accumulated other comprehensive income. The
amortized cost of debt securities is adjusted for amortization
of premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity. Such
amortization is included in Investment and interest
income.
Realized gains and losses, and declines in value judged to be
other-than-temporary
on marketable debt and equity securities, are included in
Investment and interest income. The cost of
securities sold is based on the specific identification method.
Interest and dividends on securities classified as
available-for-sale
are included in Investment and interest income.
We periodically review our marketable securities for
other-than-temporary
declines in fair value below their cost basis, or whenever
events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an
asset may not be recoverable. When assessing marketable debt and
equity securities for
other-than-temporary
declines in value, we consider factors including: the
significance of the decline in value compared to the cost basis;
the underlying factors contributing to a decline in the prices
of securities in a single asset class; how long the market value
of the investment has been less than its cost basis; any market
conditions that impact liquidity; the views of external
investment managers; any news or financial information that has
been released specific to the investee; and the outlook for the
overall industry in which the investee operates.
45
In October 2010, Pacific Biosciences completed an initial public
offering of its common stock, which now trades on the NASDAQ
Global Select Market under the symbol PACB. As a
result of the initial public offering, our preferred stock was
converted into common stock. During the quarter ended
December 31, 2010, we reclassified our investment in
Pacific Biosciences from a Level 3 investment to a
Level 1 investment with a cost basis of $50.0 million.
Our investment in Pacific Biosciences is the only marketable
equity security we held as of December 31, 2010. These
securities had a fair value of $52.1 million as of
December 31, 2010, and are included in Marketable
securities, net of current portion, on our consolidated
balance sheets. Our shares of Pacific Biosciences common
stock are subject to a customary
lock-up
period, which generally prohibits us from selling or otherwise
transferring such securities until on or about April 23,
2011 (180 days after the date of the final prospectus
relating to Pacific Biosciences initial public offering).
We do not consider our investments in marketable securities with
a current unrealized loss position to be
other-than-temporarily
impaired at December 31, 2010 because we do not intend to
sell the investments and it is not more likely than not that we
will be required to sell the investments before recovery of
their amortized cost. However, investments in an unrealized loss
position deemed to be temporary at December 31, 2010 that
have a contractual maturity of greater than 12 months have
been classified as non-current marketable securities under the
caption Marketable securities, net of current
portion, reflecting our current intent and ability to hold
such investments to maturity. Our investments in marketable debt
securities and marketable equity securities are classified as
available-for-sale.
Valuation
of inventories
We record valuation adjustments to our inventory balances for
estimated excess and obsolete inventory equal to the difference
between the cost of such inventory and its usage which is based
upon assumptions about future product demand and the shelf-life
and expiration dates for finished goods and materials used in
the manufacturing process. We operate in an environment that is
regulated by the FDA and other governmental agencies that may
place restrictions on our ability to sell our products if
certain compliance requirements are not met. We have made
assumptions that are reflected in our net inventory value based
on information currently available to us. If future product
demand, regulatory constraints or other market conditions are
less favorable than those projected by management, additional
inventory valuation reserves may be required.
We also manufacture products to conduct developmental
evaluations and clinical trials, and to validate our
manufacturing practices prior to receiving regulatory clearance
for commercial sale of our products. In these circumstances,
uncertainty exists regarding our ability to sell these products
until the FDA or other governing bodies commercially approve
them. Accordingly, the manufacturing costs of these items in
inventory are recorded as research and development, or R&D,
expense. In cases where we maintain current approved products
for further development evaluations, we may also provide
valuation allowances for these inventories due to the historical
uncertainties associated with regulated product introductions
into other markets. To the extent any of these products are sold
to end users, we record revenues and reduce inventory reserves
that are directly applicable to such products.
For 2010, 2009 and 2008, total gross charges to our inventory
reserves have not impacted gross margin, as a percentage of
sales, by more than 0.4%. We believe that similar charges to
estimated inventory reserves, and the related effect on gross
margins, are reasonably likely in the future. Historically,
changes to inventory valuation reserves in subsequent periods
have not materially affected cost of product sales.
Valuation
of goodwill and long-lived assets
Our business acquisitions typically result in the recording of
goodwill and other intangible assets, and the recorded values of
those assets may become impaired in the future. We also acquire
intangible assets in other types of transactions. As of
December 31, 2010, our goodwill and intangible assets
(excluding capitalized software), net of accumulated
amortization, were $150.3 million and $173.0 million,
respectively. The determination of the value of such intangible
assets requires management to make estimates and assumptions
that affect our consolidated financial statements. For
intangible assets purchased in a business combination, the
estimated fair values of the assets acquired are used to
establish their recorded values. Valuation techniques consistent
with the market approach, income approach
and/or cost
approach are used to measure fair value. An estimate of fair
value can be
46
affected by many assumptions which require significant judgment.
For example, the income approach requires assumptions related to
the appropriate business model to be used to estimate cash
flows, total addressable market, pricing and share forecasts,
competition, technology obsolescence, future tax rates and
discount rates. Our estimate of the fair value of certain
assets, or our conclusion that the value of certain assets is
not reliably estimable, may differ materially from
determinations made by others who use different assumptions or
utilize different business models. New information may arise in
the future that affects our fair value estimates and could
result in adjustments to our estimates in the future, which
could have an adverse impact on our results of operations.
We assess the impairment of goodwill and long-lived assets
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the
carrying value may not be recoverable. Impairment is reviewed at
least annually, and occurs at the same time in the fourth
quarter of each year, unless circumstances indicate that
impairment has occurred before the fourth quarter of any given
year. We completed our impairment test in the fourth quarter of
2010 and determined that the fair value of goodwill and
long-lived assets exceeded the carrying value of those assets
and therefore no impairment loss was necessary.
Factors we consider important that could trigger an impairment,
include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
significant underperformance relative to historical or projected
future operating results;
|
|
|
|
significant changes in the manner of our use of the acquired
assets or the strategy for our overall business;
|
|
|
|
significant negative industry or economic trends;
|
|
|
|
significant declines in our stock price for a sustained
period; and
|
|
|
|
decreased market capitalization relative to net book value.
|
When there is an indication that the carrying value of goodwill
or a long-lived asset may not be recoverable based upon the
existence of one or more of the above indicators or other
factors, an impairment loss is recognized if the carrying amount
exceeds its fair value. Any resulting impairment loss could have
an adverse impact on our operating expenses.
Our impairment analyses require management to make assumptions
and to apply judgment to estimate future cash flows and asset
fair values, including estimating the profitability of future
business strategies. We have not made any material changes in
our impairment assessment methodology during the past three
fiscal years. We do not believe there is a reasonable likelihood
that there will be a material change in the estimates or
assumptions we use to calculate long-lived asset impairment
losses. However, if actual results are not consistent with our
estimates and assumptions used in estimating future cash flows
and asset fair values, we may be exposed to losses that could be
material.
Capitalized
software costs
We capitalize costs incurred in the development of computer
software related to products under development after
establishment of technological feasibility. These capitalized
costs are recorded at the lower of unamortized cost or net
realizable value and are amortized over the estimated life of
the related product or ten years.
At December 31, 2010, capitalized software development
costs totaled $14.0 million, net of accumulated
amortization. Of that total, $13.4 million related to
products for use on our TIGRIS and PANTHER instruments, which we
began amortizing on a straight-line basis over 120 months
in May 2004 and December 2010, respectively, coinciding with the
general release of the instruments to our customers.
Recent
accounting pronouncements
For information on the recent accounting pronouncements
impacting our business, see Note 1 of the Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in this
report.
47
Results
of Operations
Amounts and percentages in the following tables and throughout
our discussion and analysis of financial condition and results
of operations may reflect rounding adjustments. Percentages have
been rounded to the nearest whole percentage.
Product
sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
|
2009/2008
|
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Clinical diagnostics
|
|
$
|
305.8
|
|
|
$
|
274.2
|
|
|
$
|
222.9
|
|
|
$
|
31.6
|
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
|
$
|
51.3
|
|
|
|
23
|
%
|
Blood screening
|
|
|
203.1
|
|
|
|
197.6
|
|
|
|
206.3
|
|
|
|
5.5
|
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
|
(8.7
|
)
|
|
|
(4
|
)%
|
Research products and services
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
|
|
12.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
15
|
%
|
|
|
12.0
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total product sales
|
|
$
|
522.7
|
|
|
$
|
483.8
|
|
|
$
|
429.2
|
|
|
$
|
38.9
|
|
|
|
8
|
%
|
|
$
|
54.6
|
|
|
|
13
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a percent of total revenues
|
|
|
96
|
%
|
|
|
97
|
%
|
|
|
91
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our primary source of revenue comes from product sales, which
consist primarily of the sale of clinical diagnostics and blood
screening products. Our clinical diagnostic product sales
consist primarily of the sale of our womens health, other
infectious disease, transplant diagnostics, and genetic testing
products. The principal customers for our clinical diagnostics
products include reference laboratories, public health
institutions and hospitals. The blood screening assays and
instruments we manufacture are marketed and distributed
worldwide through our collaboration with Novartis under the
Procleix and Ultrio trademarks.
We recognize product sales from the manufacture and shipment of
tests for screening donated blood at the contractual transfer
prices specified in our collaboration agreement with Novartis
for sales to end-user blood bank facilities located in countries
where our products have obtained governmental approvals. Blood
screening product sales are then adjusted monthly corresponding
to Novartis payment to us of amounts reflecting our
ultimate share of net revenue from sales by Novartis to end
users, less the transfer price revenues previously recorded. Net
sales are ultimately equal to the sales of the assays by
Novartis to third parties, less freight, duty and certain other
adjustments specified in our collaboration agreement with
Novartis, multiplied by our share of the net revenue.
Product sales increased by 8% in 2010 from 2009. The increase
was primarily attributed to higher APTIMA assay sales,
contributions from our acquired companies, and higher blood
screening revenues.
Product sales increased by 13% in 2009 from 2008. The increase
was primarily attributed to additional product sales from the
companies we acquired in 2009 and higher APTIMA assay sales,
partially offset by a decrease in blood screening sales,
primarily due to lower shipments and unfavorable exchange rate
impacts.
Clinical
diagnostic product sales
Clinical diagnostic product sales, including assay, instrument,
and ancillary sales, represented $305.8 million, or 59% of
product sales in 2010, compared to $274.2 million, or 57%
of product sales in 2009. The $31.6 million increase in
clinical diagnostic product sales from 2009 to 2010 is primarily
attributed to customer conversion from our
non-amplified
PACE test to our amplified APTIMA test. In general, the price of
our amplified APTIMA test is twice that of our
non-amplified
PACE product, thus the conversion from PACE to APTIMA drives an
overall increase in product sales even if underlying testing
volumes remain the same. The increase can also be attributed to
additional sales by our acquired companies in 2010 compared to
2009.
During 2010, clinical diagnostic product sales were negatively
affected as compared to 2009 by unfavorable estimated exchange
rate impacts of $0.2 million, primarily due to a stronger
U.S. dollar versus the Euro.
Clinical diagnostic product sales, including assay, instrument,
and ancillary sales, represented $274.2 million, or 57% of
product sales in 2009, compared to $222.9 million, or 52%
of product sales in 2008. The $51.3 million increase in
clinical diagnostic product sales from 2008 to 2009 is primarily
attributed to the addition of transplant diagnostic, genetic
testing and infectious disease product sales resulting from our
acquisitions of Tepnel and
48
Prodesse in 2009, volume gains in our APTIMA product line as the
result of PACE conversions, market share gains we attribute to
the superior clinical performance of our APTIMA assays and the
availability of our fully automated TIGRIS instrument.
During 2009, clinical diagnostic product sales were negatively
affected as compared to 2008 by unfavorable estimated exchange
rate impacts of $2.9 million, primarily due to a stronger
U.S. dollar versus the Euro.
Blood
screening product sales
Blood screening product sales, including assay, instrument, and
ancillary sales, represented $203.1 million, or 39% of
product sales in 2010, compared to $197.6 million, or 41%
of product sales in 2009. The $5.5 million increase in
blood screening product sales from 2009 to 2010 is primarily
attributed to an increase in blood screening product demand from
Novartis, the contractual increase in the net percentage share
of revenues we receive from Novartis, as well as an increase in
the sale of blood screening-related instrumentation. These
factors were offset by $8.2 million of one-time revenue
recognized during 2009 as a result of the renegotiation of our
collaboration agreement with Novartis.
During 2010, blood screening product sales were negatively
affected as compared to 2009 by unfavorable estimated exchange
rate impacts of $0.8 million, primarily due to a stronger
U.S. dollar versus the Euro.
Blood screening product sales, including assay, instrument, and
ancillary sales, represented $197.6 million, or 41% of
product sales in 2009, compared to $206.3 million, or 48%
of product sales in 2008. The $8.7 million decrease in
blood screening product sales from 2008 to 2009 is primarily
attributed to test demand fluctuations from our partner Novartis
and the unfavorable impact of foreign currency exchange rates,
partially offset by $8.2 million of one-time revenue
recognized during 2009. Blood screening shipments to Novartis
were $18.4 million lower in 2009 than in 2008, primarily
associated with lower U.S. shipments of the Procleix
HIV-1/HCV assay as customers began to adopt the Procleix Ultrio
assay, lower U.S. shipments of the Procleix Ultrio assay
due to the post-marketing yield study which concluded at the end
of 2008, and lower WNV test shipments. In addition to these
factors, the decrease in blood screening product sales for 2009
was also caused by a one-time $2.6 million benefit related
to our net share of revenue under our collaboration with
Novartis recorded in the prior year.
During 2009, blood screening product sales were negatively
affected as compared to 2008 by unfavorable estimated exchange
rate impacts of $6.1 million, primarily due to a stronger
U.S. dollar versus the Euro.
Research
products and services
As a result of our acquisition of Tepnel in April 2009, we have
established an additional category of product sales, which we
refer to as Research products and services. These
sales represent outsourcing services for the pharmaceutical,
biotechnology and healthcare industries, including nucleic acid
purification and analysis services, as well as the sale of
monoclonal antibodies. These sales totaled $13.8 million in
2010 as compared to $12.0 million in 2009. The increase
from 2009 to 2010 is primarily due to an additional quarter of
research products and services revenues that were not present in
the prior year due to our acquisition of Tepnel in April 2009.
Collaborative
research revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
2009/2008
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
Collaborative research revenue
|
|
$14.5
|
|
$7.9
|
|
$20.6
|
|
$
|
6.6
|
|
|
|
84
|
%
|
|
$
|
(12.7
|
)
|
|
|
(62
|
)%
|
As a percent of total revenues
|
|
3%
|
|
2%
|
|
4%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We recognize collaborative research revenue over the term of
various collaboration agreements, as negotiated monthly
contracted amounts are earned, in relative proportion to the
performance required under the contracts, or as reimbursable
costs are incurred related to those agreements. Non-refundable
license fees are recognized over the related performance period
or at the time that we have satisfied all performance
obligations. Milestone payments are recognized as revenue upon
the achievement of specified milestones.
49
The costs associated with collaborative research revenue are
based on fully burdened full-time equivalent rates and are
reflected in our consolidated statements of income under the
captions Research and development, Marketing
and sales and General and administrative,
based on the nature of the costs. We do not separately track all
of the costs applicable to our collaborations and, therefore,
are not able to quantify all of the costs associated with
collaborative research revenue.
Collaborative research revenue increased 84% in 2010 compared to
2009. The $6.6 million increase was primarily due to
reimbursements from Novartis for shared development expenses
attributable to the development of the PANTHER instrument and
product enhancements for use in the blood screening market.
Collaborative research revenue decreased 62% in 2009 compared to
2008. The $12.7 million decrease was primarily due to a
non-recurring $10.0 million milestone payment received from
Novartis in the prior year and $4.5 million of revenue
received from 3M Corporation related to our
healthcare-associated infection collaboration which ended in
June 2008. These decreases were partially offset by increased
reimbursements from Novartis for shared development expenses,
primarily attributable to development efforts for the PANTHER
instrument in 2009.
Collaborative research revenue tends to fluctuate based on the
type and amount of research services performed, the status of
projects under collaboration and the achievement of milestones.
Due to the nature of our collaborative research revenue, results
in any one period are not necessarily indicative of results to
be achieved in the future. Our ability to generate additional
collaborative research revenue depends, in part, on our ability
to initiate and maintain relationships with potential and
current collaborative partners and the advancement of related
collaborative research and development.
Royalty
and license revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
2009/2008
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
Royalty and license revenue
|
|
$6.1
|
|
$6.6
|
|
$22.9
|
|
$
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)%
|
|
$
|
(16.3
|
)
|
|
|
(71
|
)%
|
As a percent of total revenues
|
|
1%
|
|
1%
|
|
5%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We recognize revenue for royalties due to us under license
agreements with third parties upon the manufacture, sale or use
of our products or technologies. For those arrangements where
royalties are reasonably estimable, we recognize revenue based
on estimates of royalties earned during the applicable period
and adjust for differences between the estimated and actual
royalties. Historically, these adjustments have not been
material. For those arrangements where royalties are not
reasonably estimable, we recognize revenue upon receipt of
royalty statements from the applicable licensee. Non-refundable
license fees are recognized over the related performance period
or at the time that we have satisfied all performance
obligations.
Royalty and license revenue decreased by 8% in 2010 as compared
to 2009. The $0.5 million decrease was primarily a result
of lower collaboration royalties received from Novartis related
to the plasma testing market.
Royalty and license revenue decreased by 71% in 2009 as compared
to 2008. The $16.3 million decrease was primarily due to
the $16.4 million payment we received from Siemens, as an
assignee of Bayer, during the first quarter of 2008.
Royalty and license revenue may fluctuate based on the nature of
the related agreements and the timing of receipt of license
fees. Results in any one period are not necessarily indicative
of results to be achieved in the future. In addition, our
ability to generate additional royalty and license revenue will
depend, in part, on our ability to market and commercialize our
technologies.
50
Cost
of product sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
2009/2008
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
Cost of product sales
|
|
$
|
169.2
|
|
|
$
|
152.4
|
|
|
$
|
128.0
|
|
|
$
|
16.8
|
|
|
|
11%
|
|
|
$
|
24.4
|
|
|
|
19%
|
|
Gross profit margin as a percent of product sales
|
|
|
68%
|
|
|
|
69%
|
|
|
|
70%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales includes direct material, direct labor and
manufacturing overhead associated with the production of
inventories. Cost of product sales may fluctuate significantly
in different periods based on changes in production volumes for
both commercially approved products and products under
development or in clinical trials. Cost of product sales is also
affected by manufacturing efficiencies, allowances for scrap or
expired material, additional costs related to initial production
quantities of new products after achieving FDA approval,
instrument and software amortization, and contractual
adjustments, such as instrumentation costs, instrument service
costs, warranty costs and royalties. Cost of product sales
excludes the amortization of acquisition-related intangibles.
In addition, we manufacture significant quantities of materials,
development lots, and clinical trial lots of product prior to
receiving approval from the FDA for commercial sale. The
majority of costs associated with development lots are
classified as R&D expense. The portion of a development lot
that is manufactured for commercial sale is capitalized to
inventory and classified as cost of product sales upon shipment.
Cost of product sales increased 11% in 2010 compared to 2009.
The $16.8 million increase was primarily due to additional
cost of product sales by our acquired companies and increases
attributed to instrumentation, APTIMA, and blood screening
product shipments. These higher costs were partially offset by
favorable manufacturing variances related to changes in
production volumes.
Our gross profit margin as a percentage of product sales
decreased to 68% in 2010 from 69% in 2009. The decrease in gross
profit margin as a percentage of product sales was principally
attributed to lower gross margins in blood screening product
sales as a result of an increase in test shipments as a
proportion of our overall share of blood screening revenues,
lower overall gross margin percentage at our acquired Tepnel
businesses and increased sales of lower margin instrumentation.
These decreases were partially offset by increased sales of
higher margin APTIMA products.
Cost of product sales increased 19% in 2009 compared to 2008.
The $24.4 million increase was primarily due to additional
cost of product sales as a result of our acquisitions of Tepnel
and Prodesse, manufacturing variances related to changes in
production volumes, increased instrumentation volume, and
increased APTIMA sales. These increased costs were partially
offset by lower blood screening assay shipments.
Our gross profit margin as a percentage of product sales
decreased to 69% in 2009 from 70% in 2008. The decrease in gross
profit margin as a percentage of product sales was principally
attributed to lower overall gross margin percentages for the
acquired Tepnel business, increased cost of product sales
related to changes in production volumes and increased sales of
lower margin instrumentation, which were partially offset by
increased APTIMA sales.
A portion of our blood screening revenues is attributable to
sales of TIGRIS instruments to Novartis, which totaled
$15.9 million, $15.9 million and $12.4 million
during 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Under our
collaboration agreement with Novartis, we sell TIGRIS
instruments to them at prices that approximate cost and share in
profits of end-user sales in the United States. These instrument
sales, therefore, negatively impact our gross margin percentage
in the periods when they occur, but are a necessary precursor to
increased sales of blood screening assays in the future.
51
Acquisition-related
intangible amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
2009/2008
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
Acquisition-related intangible amortization
|
|
$8.8
|
|
$4.1
|
|
$
|
|
$
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
115
|
%
|
|
$
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
As a percent of total revenues
|
|
2%
|
|
1%
|
|
0%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization expense related to our acquired intangible assets
increased 115% in 2010 as compared to 2009. The
$4.7 million increase was attributable to an additional
three months of amortization expense resulting from our
acquisition of Tepnel in April 2009 as well as an additional
nine months of amortization expense resulting from our
acquisition of Prodesse in October 2009. Our acquired intangible
assets are amortized using the straight-line method over their
estimated useful lives, which range from 5 to 20 years. For
details on the intangible assets acquired as part of our
acquisitions of Tepnel, Prodesse and GTI Diagnostics, please
refer to Note 2 Business combinations, of the
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included
elsewhere in this report.
Research
and development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
2009/2008
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
Research and development
|
|
$111.1
|
|
$106.0
|
|
$101.1
|
|
$
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
|
$
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
As a percent of total revenues
|
|
20%
|
|
21%
|
|
21%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We invest significantly in R&D as part of our ongoing
efforts to develop new products and technologies. Our R&D
expenses include the development of proprietary products and
instrument platforms, as well as expenses related to the
development of new products and technologies in collaboration
with our partners. R&D spending is dependent on the status
of projects under development and may vary substantially between
quarterly or annual reporting periods.
R&D expenses increased 5% in 2010 from 2009. The
$5.1 million increase was primarily related to our acquired
Tepnel and Prodesse businesses, partially offset by a decline in
clinical trial expenses for our HPV assay.
R&D expenses increased 5% in 2009 from 2008. The
$4.9 million increase was primarily due to the addition of
Tepnels R&D expenses as well as increased spending
for clinical evaluations primarily associated with our HPV
clinical trial, partially offset by a decrease in amortization
due mostly to an impairment charge recorded in the second
quarter of 2008 associated with our license agreement with
Corixa Corporation.
Marketing
and sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
2009/2008
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
Marketing and sales
|
|
$
|
59.5
|
|
|
$
|
53.9
|
|
|
$
|
45.9
|
|
|
$
|
5.6
|
|
|
|
10%
|
|
|
$
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
17%
|
|
As a percent of total revenues
|
|
|
11%
|
|
|
|
11%
|
|
|
|
10%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our marketing and sales expenses include salaries and other
personnel-related expenses, promotional expenses, and outside
services.
Marketing and sales expenses increased 10% in 2010 from 2009.
The $5.6 million increase is primarily attributed to an
increase in salaries, personnel-related expenses, and marketing
activities due to our continued investment in international
expansion, primarily in Western Europe, and our acquisition of
Prodesse in October 2009.
52
Marketing and sales expenses increased 17% in 2009 from 2008.
The $8.0 million increase is primarily attributed to the
addition of marketing and sales expenses as a result of our
acquisition of Tepnel, as well as an increase in salaries and
personnel-related expenses due to our continued investment in
international expansion efforts, primarily in Western Europe,
and the related promotion and sale of our CE-marked PCA3 and HPV
products.
General
and administrative
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
2009/2008
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
$
|
56.8
|
|
|
$
|
61.8
|
|
|
$
|
52.3
|
|
|
$
|
(5.0
|
)
|
|
|
(8
|
)%
|
|
$
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
18
|
%
|
As a percent of total revenues
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
12
|
%
|
|
|
11
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our general and administrative, or G&A, expenses include
expenses for finance, legal, strategic planning and business
development, public relations and human resources.
G&A expenses decreased 8% in 2010 from 2009. The
$5.0 million decrease is primarily attributable to the
receipt in August 2010 of a $2.9 million arbitration award
for attorneys fees and costs related to our arbitration
proceeding with Digene and lower G&A costs associated with
our acquired Tepnel and Prodesse businesses. This decrease was
partially offset by an increase in legal fees relating to our
litigation with BD, and an increase in expenses related to the
consolidation of our United Kingdom operations and costs
associated with the acquisition of GTI Diagnostics.
G&A expenses increased 18% in 2009 from 2008. The
$9.5 million increase is primarily attributed to the
addition of Tepnels G&A expenses, as well as business
development costs associated with the Tepnel and Prodesse
acquisitions and the spin-off of our industrial testing assets
to Roka in 2009. These increases were partially offset by a
decrease in legal fees due to the completion of the Digene
arbitration.
Total
other income, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
|
2009/2008
|
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
Investment and interest income
|
|
$
|
11.8
|
|
|
$
|
21.6
|
|
|
$
|
16.8
|
|
|
$
|
(9.8
|
)
|
|
|
(45
|
)%
|
|
$
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
29
|
%
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
16
|
%
|
|
|
(1.9
|
)
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
Gain on contingent consideration
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
(100
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income, net
|
|
$
|
17.4
|
|
|
$
|
19.7
|
|
|
$
|
15.5
|
|
|
$
|
(2.3
|
)
|
|
|
(12
|
)%
|
|
$
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
27
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income, net, decreased 12% in 2010 from 2009. The
$9.8 million decrease in investment and interest income is
primarily attributed to lower net realized gains on sales of
marketable securities, decreased interest income due to lower
investment balances in 2010 as a result of the sale of
investments to fund our recent acquisitions, cash used for our
stock repurchase program, and higher purchase premium
amortizations arising from increased market demand for
tax-advantaged municipal bonds. Interest expense attributable to
borrowings under our credit facility with Bank of America during
2010 increased $0.3 million as compared to 2009 due to a
full year of recognized interest costs in 2010, and higher
average monthly fees based on the London Interbank Offered Rate,
or LIBOR.
We recorded a non-cash gain of $8.0 million in 2010 as a
result of a reduction in the fair value of the contingent
consideration liability related to our acquisition of Prodesse.
The fair value of the contingent consideration liability was
reduced to $0 as of December 31, 2010 because we do not
currently expect to make any further milestone payments related
to our acquisition of Prodesse. Future milestone payments, if
any, will occur by the second quarter
53
of 2012. The net increase in other expense of $0.2 million
in 2010 from 2009 was primarily attributable to exchange rate
impacts.
Total other income, net, increased 27% in 2009 from 2008. The
$4.8 million increase in investment and interest income is
primarily attributed to $10.5 million in net realized gains
on sales of marketable securities, partially offset by decreased
interest income due to lower investment balances in 2009 as a
result of our recent acquisitions and cash used for our stock
repurchase program. In 2009, we recorded $1.9 million of
interest expense attributable to borrowings under our credit
facility with Bank of America. The $1.3 million net
increase in other income in 2009 from 2008 was primarily
attributable to a $1.6 million impairment charge on our
investment in Qualigen recorded in the third quarter of 2008, as
well as favorable exchange rate impacts in 2009.
Income
tax expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
2009/2008
|
(Dollars in millions)
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
$ Change
|
|
% Change
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
$48.3
|
|
$48.0
|
|
$53.9
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
$
|
(5.9
|
)
|
|
|
(11
|
)%
|
As a percent of income before tax
|
|
31%
|
|
34%
|
|
34%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our effective tax rate in 2010 decreased from 2009 primarily due
to the expiration of statutes of limitations for past tax
returns, contingent consideration adjustments in 2010 that are
generally not taxable, and a statutory increase in
U.S. domestic manufacturing tax benefits, offset by the
negative impact of lower tax advantaged interest income.
Our effective tax rate in 2009 was consistent with 2008
primarily due to the combined effect of greater benefits from
research tax credits and the negative impact of lower tax
advantaged interest income.
Liquidity
and capital resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents and current marketable securities
|
|
$
|
230.3
|
|
|
$
|
485.6
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
93.3
|
|
|
|
333.6
|
|
Current ratio
|
|
|
1.3:1
|
|
|
|
2.1:1
|
|
Our working capital at December 31, 2010 decreased
$240.3 million from December 31, 2009. This decline in
working capital can be attributed to an increase in our
non-current marketable securities of $243.8 million from
December 31, 2009 to December 31, 2010. Our
non-current marketable securities at December 31, 2010
include $207.2 million of marketable debt securities and a
$52.1 million equity investment in Pacific Biosciences.
During 2010, we generated $169.6 million of cash from
operations. Additionally we used $99.9 million to
repurchase shares under our 2010 stock repurchase program and
$53.0 million to acquire GTI Diagnostics.
The primary objectives of our investment policy are liquidity
and safety of principal. Consistent with these objectives,
investments are made with the goal of achieving the highest rate
of return. The policy places emphasis on securities of high
credit quality, with restrictions placed on maturities and
concentration by security type and issue.
Our marketable securities include equity securities, treasury
securities, tax advantaged municipal securities and FDIC insured
corporate bonds with a minimum Moodys credit rating of A3
or a Standard & Poors credit rating of A-. As of
December 31, 2010, we did not hold auction rate securities
and have never held any such securities. Our investment policy
limits the effective maturity on individual securities to six
years and an average portfolio maturity
54
to three years. At December 31, 2010, our portfolios had an
average maturity of two years and an average credit quality of
AA1 as defined by Moodys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
$ Change
|
|
$ Change
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
2010/2009
|
|
2009/2008
|
|
|
(In millions)
|
|
Cash provided by (used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
$
|
169.6
|
|
|
$
|
145.0
|
|
|
$
|
178.3
|
|
|
$
|
24.6
|
|
|
$
|
(33.3
|
)
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
(114.5
|
)
|
|
|
(198.4
|
)
|
|
|
(139.9
|
)
|
|
|
83.9
|
|
|
|
(58.5
|
)
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
(75.9
|
)
|
|
|
74.8
|
|
|
|
(53.5
|
)
|
|
|
(150.7
|
)
|
|
|
128.3
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment (included in
investing activities above)
|
|
|
(30.7
|
)
|
|
|
(32.4
|
)
|
|
|
(39.3
|
)
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
Our primary source of liquidity has been cash from operations,
which includes the collection of accounts and other receivables
related to product sales, collaborative research agreements, and
royalty and license fees. Additionally, our liquidity was
enhanced in 2009 by our credit facility with Bank of America,
described in Note 10 Borrowings, of the Notes
to the Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in
this report. Our primary short-term cash needs, which are
subject to change, include continued R&D spending to
support new products, costs related to commercialization of
products and purchases of instrument systems for placement with
our customers. In addition, we may use cash for strategic
purchases which may include the acquisition of businesses
and/or
technologies complementary to our business and for stock
repurchase programs. Certain R&D costs may be funded under
collaboration agreements with our collaboration partners.
Operating activities provided net cash of $169.6 million in
2010, primarily from net income of $106.9 million and net
non-cash charges of $62.6 million. Non-cash charges
primarily consisted of depreciation of $26.8 million,
stock-based compensation expense of $24.1 million,
amortization of intangibles of $17.7 million and a non-cash
gain on contingent consideration of $8.0 million.
Net cash used in investing activities in 2010 was
$114.5 million. Uses of cash included $53.0 million to
acquire GTI Diagnostics, a $50.0 million investment in
Pacific Biosciences, purchases of property, plant and equipment
of $30.7 million and purchases of capitalized software of
$3.9 million. Offsetting our uses of cash in 2010 were
$26.4 million in net proceeds from the sale and maturities
of marketable securities.
Net cash used in financing activities in 2010 was
$75.9 million, primarily driven by $99.9 million used
to repurchase and retire approximately 2,165,000 shares of
our common stock under our 2010 stock repurchase program and a
$10.0 million payment made to former Prodesse
securityholders for achievement of an acquisition-related
milestone, partially offset by $31.8 million in proceeds
from the issuance of our common stock under stock option and
employee stock purchase plans.
We believe that our available cash balances, anticipated cash
flows from operations, proceeds from stock option exercises and
borrowings under our credit facility will be sufficient to
satisfy our operating needs for the foreseeable future. However,
we operate in a rapidly evolving and often unpredictable
business environment that may change the timing or amount of
expected future cash receipts and expenditures. Accordingly, we
may in the future be required to raise additional funds through
the sale of equity or debt securities or from additional credit
facilities. Additional capital, if needed, may not be available
on satisfactory terms, if at all. Further, debt financing may
subject us to covenants restricting our operations. Because our
current credit facility is secured by our marketable debt
securities, any significant needs for cash may cause us to
liquidate some or all of our marketable debt securities
resulting in the need to partially or completely pay down, or
refinance, this indebtedness.
55
Contractual
obligations and commercial commitments
Our contractual obligations due for purchase commitments,
collaborative agreements and minimum royalties as of
December 31, 2010 were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More Than
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
1-3 Years
|
|
|
3-5 Years
|
|
|
5 Years
|
|
|
Material purchase
commitments(1)
|
|
$
|
48.4
|
|
|
$
|
37.4
|
|
|
$
|
5.2
|
|
|
$
|
5.5
|
|
|
$
|
0.3
|
|
Operating
leases(2)
|
|
|
27.6
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
5.3
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
16.2
|
|
Collaborative
commitments(3)
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Minimum royalty
commitments(4)
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
Deferred employee
compensation(5)
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Capital
leases(6)
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit facility, including accrued
interest(7)
|
|
|
240.4
|
|
|
|
240.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total(8)
|
|
$
|
341.0
|
|
|
$
|
283.7
|
|
|
$
|
17.3
|
|
|
$
|
15.4
|
|
|
$
|
24.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts represent our minimum purchase commitments for
instruments and raw materials from key vendors. |
|
(2) |
|
Reflects obligations for facilities and vehicles under operating
leases in place as of December 31, 2010. Future minimum
lease payments are included in the table above. |
|
(3) |
|
In addition to the minimum payments due under our collaborative
agreements included in the table above, we may be required to
pay up to $9.8 million in milestone payments, plus
royalties on net sales of any products using specified
technology. |
|
(4) |
|
Amounts represent our minimum royalties due on the net sales of
products incorporating licensed technology and subject to a
minimum annual royalty payment. During 2010, we recorded
$9.8 million in royalty costs related to our various
license agreements. |
|
(5) |
|
The $4.0 million represents deferred compensation plan
liabilities for in-service distributions. Our total deferred
compensation plan liability as of December 31, 2010 was
$6.2 million, which includes the $4.0 million included
in the table above and $2.2 million due to employees upon
retirement. We have excluded the amount payable upon employee
retirement from the table above as we cannot reasonably predict
when such retirement events may occur. |
|
(6) |
|
Reflects obligations on capital leases in place as of
December 31, 2010. Interest amounts were not material;
therefore, capital lease obligations are shown net of interest
expense in the table above. |
|
(7) |
|
As of December 31, 2010, the total principal amount
outstanding under our revolving credit facility with Bank of
America was $240.0 million. The term of this credit
facility is due to expire in February 2012. Interest payable on
this outstanding amount included in the table above has been
estimated based on the interest rate payable at
December 31, 2010, which was approximately 0.86%. In
addition, we are required to pay a commitment fee on funds
available for borrowing under the credit facility, which has
also been estimated for the remaining term of the credit
facility based on the fixed-rate of 0.25% at December 31,
2010. |
|
(8) |
|
Does not include amounts relating to our obligations under our
collaboration with Novartis, pursuant to which both parties have
obligations to each other. Under our collaboration agreement
with Novartis, we are obligated to manufacture and supply blood
screening assays to Novartis, and Novartis is obligated to
purchase all of the assay quantities specified on a
90-day
demand forecast, due 90 days prior to the date Novartis
intends to take delivery, and certain quantities specified on a
rolling
12-month
forecast. |
Liabilities associated with uncertain tax positions, currently
estimated at $10.6 million (including interest), are not
included in the table above as we cannot reasonably estimate
when, if ever, an amount would be paid to a government agency.
Ultimate settlement of these liabilities is dependent on factors
outside of our control, such as examinations by each agency and
expiration of statutes of limitation for assessment of
additional taxes.
56
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
We do not currently have and have never had any relationships
with unconsolidated entities or financial partnerships, such as
entities often referred to as structured finance or special
purpose entities, which would have been established for the
purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet arrangements or other
contractually narrow or limited purposes. In addition, we do not
engage in trading activities involving non-exchange traded
contracts. As such, we are not materially exposed to any
financing, liquidity, market or credit risk that could arise if
we had engaged in these relationships.
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
Interest
Rate Risk
Our exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates
relates primarily to interest earned on our investment portfolio
and the amount of interest payable on our senior secured
revolving credit facility with Bank of America. As of
December 31, 2010, the total principal amount outstanding
under the revolving credit facility was $240.0 million. At
our option, loans accrue interest at a per annum rate based on,
either: the base rate (the base rate is defined as the greatest
of (i) the federal funds rate plus a margin equal to 0.50%,
(ii) Bank of Americas prime rate and (iii) LIBOR
plus a margin equal to 1.00%); or LIBOR plus a margin equal to
0.60%, in each case for interest periods of 1, 2, 3 or
6 months as selected by us. We do not believe that we are
exposed to significant interest rate risk with respect to our
credit facility based on our option to select the rate at which
interest accrues under the credit facility, the short-term
nature of the borrowings and our ability to pay off the
outstanding balance in a timely manner if the applicable
interest rate under the credit facility increases above the
current interest rate yields on our investment portfolio. A
100 basis point increase or decrease in interest rates
would increase or decrease our interest expense by approximately
$2.4 million on an annual basis.
Our risk associated with fluctuating interest income is limited
to our investments in interest rate sensitive financial
instruments. Under our current policies, we do not use interest
rate derivative instruments to manage this exposure to interest
rate changes. We seek to ensure the safety and preservation of
our invested principal by limiting default risk, market risk,
and reinvestment risk. We mitigate default risk by investing in
investment grade securities with an average portfolio maturity
of no more than three years. A 25 basis point increase or
decrease in interest rates would increase or decrease our
current investment balance by approximately $2.3 million.
While changes in interest rates may affect the fair value of our
investment portfolio, any gains or losses are not recognized in
our consolidated statements of income until the investment is
sold or if a reduction in fair value is determined to be
other-than-temporary.
Foreign
Currency Exchange Risk
Although the majority of our revenue is realized in
U.S. dollars, some portions of our revenue are realized in
foreign currencies. As a result, our financial results could be
affected by factors such as changes in foreign currency exchange
rates or weak economic conditions in foreign markets. We
translate the financial statements of our
non-U.S. operations
using the
end-of-period
exchange rates for assets and liabilities and the average
exchange rates for each reporting period for results of
operations. Net gains and losses resulting from the translation
of foreign financial statements and the effect of exchange rates
in intercompany receivables and payables of a long-term
investment nature are recorded as a separate component of
stockholders equity under the caption Accumulated
other comprehensive income. These adjustments will affect
net income upon the sale or liquidation of the underlying
investment.
Under our collaboration agreement with Novartis, a growing
portion of blood screening product sales is from western
European countries. As a result, our international blood
screening product sales are affected by changes in the foreign
currency exchange rates of those countries where Novartis
business is conducted in Euros or other local currencies. Based
on international blood screening product sales in 2010, a 10%
movement of currency exchange rates would result in a blood
screening product sales increase or decrease of approximately
$5.2 million annually. Similarly, a 10% movement of
currency exchange rates would result in a clinical diagnostic
product sales increase or decrease of approximately
$4.9 million annually. A 10% movement of currency exchange
rates would result in a research products and services sales
increase or decrease of approximately $1.4 million
annually. The majority of our collaborative research revenues
and royalty and license revenues are denominated in
U.S. dollars and, as such,
57
are not subject to exchange rate exposure. Our exposure for both
blood screening and clinical diagnostic product sales is
primarily in the U.S. dollar versus the Euro, British
pound, Australian dollar and Canadian dollar.
Our total payables denominated in foreign currencies as of
December 31, 2010 were not material. Our receivables by
currency as of December 31, 2010 reflected in
U.S. dollar equivalents were as follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. dollar
|
|
$
|
42.4
|
|
Euro
|
|
|
6.2
|
|
British pound
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
Canadian dollar
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
Czech koruna
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
Danish krone
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross trade accounts receivable
|
|
$
|
55.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In order to reduce the effect of foreign currency fluctuations,
from time to time we have used foreign currency forward
contracts, or forward contracts, to hedge certain foreign
currency transaction exposures. Specifically, we entered into
forward contracts with a maturity of approximately 30 days
to hedge against the foreign exchange exposure created by
certain balances that were denominated in a currency other than
the principal reporting currency of the entity recording the
transaction. These types of forward contracts do not qualify for
hedge accounting and, accordingly, all of these instruments are
marked to market at each balance sheet date by a charge to
earnings. The gains and losses on such forward contracts are
meant to mitigate the gains and losses on outstanding foreign
currency transactions. We believe that such forward contracts,
when used, do not subject us to undue risk due to foreign
exchange movements because gains and losses on these contracts
are generally offset by losses and gains on the underlying
assets and liabilities. We do not use derivatives for trading or
speculative purposes.
We did not enter into any foreign currency forward contracts
during 2010.
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
Our consolidated financial statements and the Reports of
Ernst & Young LLP, our Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm, are included in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K
on pages F-1 through F-44.
|
|
Item 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None.
|
|
Item 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed
to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our
current and periodic reports is recorded, processed, summarized
and reported within the time periods specified in the SECs
rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and
communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In designing and
evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management
recognized that any controls and procedures, no matter how well
designed and operated, can provide only reasonable and not
absolute assurance of achieving the desired control objectives.
In reaching a reasonable level of assurance, management was
required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit
relationship of possible controls and procedures.
In addition, the design of any system of controls is also based
in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future
events, and there can be no assurance that any design will
succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future
conditions; over time, controls may become inadequate because of
changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with policies
or procedures may deteriorate. Because of the inherent
limitations in a cost-effective control system, misstatements
due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
58
Conclusion
Regarding the Effectiveness of Disclosure Controls and
Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the
participation of our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the
design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures,
as defined in
Rules 13a-15(e)
and
15d-15(e)
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Based on
this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures
were effective as of December 31, 2010.
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
An evaluation was also performed under the supervision and with
the participation of our management, including our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of any change in
our internal control over financial reporting that occurred
during our last fiscal quarter and that has materially affected,
or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
control over financial reporting. That evaluation did not
identify any change in our internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during our latest fiscal quarter and
that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Managements
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term
is defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f).
All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have
inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined
to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with
respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.
Under the supervision and with the participation of our
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation of the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2010 based on the framework in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (COSO). Based on our evaluation under the framework
in Internal Control Integrated Framework, our
management concluded that our internal control over financial
reporting was effective as of December 31, 2010.
On December 15, 2010, we completed the acquisition of GTI
Diagnostics. The 2010 financial statements of GTI constituted
less than 10% of our total assets as of December 31, 2010
and less than 10% of our total revenues and net income for the
year then ended. We have not completed our evaluation of the
design and operation of internal control over financial
reporting of this consolidated subsidiary as of
December 31, 2010 due to the timing of the completion of
the transaction and as allowed by Securities and Exchange
Commission rules. We will complete such evaluation in fiscal
year 2011.
Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public
accounting firm, has issued an attestation report on the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting
as of December 31, 2010. This report, which expressed an
unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of our internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, is
included elsewhere herein.
59
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Gen-Probe Incorporated:
We have audited Gen-Probe Incorporateds internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on
criteria established in Internal Control Integrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). Gen-Probe
Incorporateds management is responsible for maintaining
effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its
assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting included in the accompanying
Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the
companys internal control over financial reporting based
on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
As indicated in the accompanying Managements Report on
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting, managements
assessment of and conclusion on the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting did not include the internal
controls of GTI Diagnostics, which is included in the 2010
consolidated financial statements of Gen-Probe Incorporated and
constituted less than 10% of total assets as of
December 31, 2010 and less than 10% of revenues and net
income for the year then ended. Our audit of internal control
over financial reporting of Gen-Probe Incorporated also did not
include an evaluation of the internal control over financial
reporting of GTI Diagnostics.
In our opinion, Gen-Probe Incorporated maintained, in all
material respects, effective internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on the COSO
criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheets of Gen-Probe Incorporated as of
December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated
statements of income, cash flows and stockholders equity
for each of the three years in the period ended
December 31, 2010 and our report dated February 23,
2011 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
San Diego, California
February 23, 2011
60
|
|
Item 9B.
|
Other
Information
|
None.
PART III
|
|
Item 10.
|
Directors,
Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
|
The information required by this Item is incorporated in this
report by reference from the information under the captions
Information Regarding the Board of Directors and Corporate
Governance, Executives and
Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting
Compliance contained in the Proxy Statement to be filed in
connection with our 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, or the
Proxy Statement.
We have adopted a code of ethics for directors, officers
(including our principal executive officer, principal financial
officer and principal accounting officer) and employees, known
as the Code of Ethics. The Code of Ethics is available on our
website at
http://www.gen-probe.com.
Stockholders may request a free copy of the Code of Ethics from:
Gen-Probe Incorporated
Attention: Investor Relations
10210 Genetic Center Drive
San Diego, CA
92121-4362
(858) 410-8000
http://www.gen-probe.com
|
|
Item 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
The information required by this Item is incorporated in this
report by reference from the information under the captions
Executive Compensation, Compensation Committee
Interlocks and Insider Participation and
Compensation Committee Report contained in the Proxy
Statement.
|
|
Item 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
The information required by this Item is incorporated in this
report by reference from the information under the captions
Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and
Management and Equity Compensation Plan
Information contained in the Proxy Statement.
|
|
Item 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director
Independence
|
The information required by this Item is incorporated in this
report by reference from the information under the captions
Certain Related-Person Transactions,
Related-Person Transactions Policy and Procedures
and Information Regarding the Board of Directors and
Corporate Governance contained in the Proxy Statement.
|
|
Item 14.
|
Principal
Accounting Fees and Services
|
The information required by this Item is incorporated in this
report by reference from the information under the captions
Principal Accountant Fees and Services and
Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures contained in
the Proxy Statement.
61
PART IV
|
|
Item 15.
|
Exhibits
and Financial Statement Schedules
|
(a) Documents filed as part of this report.
1. The following financial statements of Gen-Probe
Incorporated and Report of Ernst & Young LLP,
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, are included in
this report:
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Consolidated Balance Sheets at December 31, 2010 and 2009
Consolidated Statements of Income for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2010
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2010
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders Equity for each of
the three years in the period ended December 31, 2010
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
2. Schedule II Valuation and Qualifying
Accounts and Reserves for each of the three years in the period
ended December 31, 2010
Financial Statement schedules. All other schedules are omitted
because they are not applicable or the required information is
shown in the Financial Statements or notes thereto.
3. List of Exhibits required by Item 601 of
Regulation S-K.
(b) Exhibits. See the Exhibit Index and
Exhibits filed or furnished in connection with this report.
62
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused
this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.
GEN-PROBE INCORPORATED
Carl W. Hull
President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive
Officer)
Date: February 23, 2011
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons
on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the
dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Carl
W. Hull
Carl
W. Hull
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal
Executive Officer)
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Herm
Rosenman
Herm
Rosenman
|
|
Senior Vice President Finance and Chief Financial
Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Henry
L. Nordhoff
Henry
L. Nordhoff
|
|
Chairman
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John
W. Brown
John
W. Brown
|
|
Director
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Armin
M. Kessler
Armin
M. Kessler
|
|
Director
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ John
C. Martin
John
C. Martin, Ph.D.
|
|
Director
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Brian
A. McNamee
Brian
A. McNamee, M.B.B.S.
|
|
Director
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Phillip
M. Schneider
Phillip
M. Schneider
|
|
Director
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Lucy
Shapiro
Lucy
Shapiro, Ph.D.
|
|
Director
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Abraham
D. Sofaer
Abraham
D. Sofaer
|
|
Director
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Patrick
J. Sullivan
Patrick
J. Sullivan
|
|
Director
|
|
February 23, 2011
|
63
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
CONSOLIDATED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
CONTENTS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page
|
|
|
|
|
F-2
|
|
|
|
|
F-3
|
|
|
|
|
F-4
|
|
|
|
|
F-5
|
|
|
|
|
F-6
|
|
|
|
|
F-7
|
|
F-1
REPORT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Gen-Probe Incorporated:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Gen-Probe Incorporated as of December 31, 2010 and 2009,
and the related consolidated statements of income, cash flows
and stockholders equity for each of the three years in the
period ended December 31, 2010. Our audits also included
the financial statement schedule listed in the Index at
Item 15(a). These financial statements and schedule are the
responsibility of the Companys management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements and schedule based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of Gen-Probe Incorporated at
December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the consolidated results of
its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2010, in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also, in our
opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when
considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken
as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the
information set forth therein.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States),
Gen-Probe Incorporateds internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2010, based on criteria
established in Internal Control Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission and our report dated February 23, 2011
expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
San Diego, California
February 23, 2011
F-2
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
(In
thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
ASSETS
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents, including restricted cash of $16 and
$17 at December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009,
respectively
|
|
$
|
59,690
|
|
|
$
|
82,616
|
|
Marketable securities
|
|
|
170,648
|
|
|
|
402,990
|
|
Trade accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful
accounts of $355 and $516 at December 31, 2010 and
December 31, 2009, respectively
|
|
|
54,739
|
|
|
|
55,305
|
|
Accounts receivable other
|
|
|
5,493
|
|
|
|
4,707
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
66,416
|
|
|
|
61,071
|
|
Deferred income tax
|
|
|
13,634
|
|
|
|
13,959
|
|
Prepaid income tax
|
|
|
2,993
|
|
|
|
7,317
|
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
|
11,672
|
|
|
|
14,526
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
5,148
|
|
|
|
4,708
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
390,433
|
|
|
|
647,199
|
|
Marketable securities, net of current portion
|
|
|
259,317
|
|
|
|
15,472
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
160,863
|
|
|
|
157,437
|
|
Capitalized software, net
|
|
|
13,981
|
|
|
|
12,560
|
|
Patents, net
|
|
|
12,450
|
|
|
|
1,556
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
150,308
|
|
|
|
122,680
|
|
Purchased intangibles, net
|
|
|
120,270
|
|
|
|
108,015
|
|
License, manufacturing access fees and other assets, net
|
|
|
60,175
|
|
|
|
63,266
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
1,167,797
|
|
|
$
|
1,128,185
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
14,614
|
|
|
$
|
20,455
|
|
Accrued salaries and employee benefits
|
|
|
26,825
|
|
|
|
24,775
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
13,935
|
|
|
|
24,755
|
|
Income tax payable
|
|
|
634
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term borrowings
|
|
|
240,000
|
|
|
|
240,127
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
1,166
|
|
|
|
3,527
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
297,174
|
|
|
|
313,639
|
|
Non-current income tax payable
|
|
|
8,315
|
|
|
|
5,958
|
|
Deferred income tax
|
|
|
29,775
|
|
|
|
23,220
|
|
Deferred revenue, net of current portion
|
|
|
2,500
|
|
|
|
1,978
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
6,654
|
|
|
|
16,215
|
|
Commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value per share;
20,000,000 shares authorized, none issued and outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.0001 par value per share;
200,000,000 shares authorized, 47,966,156 and
49,143,798 shares issued and outstanding at
December 31, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
195,820
|
|
|
|
242,615
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
|
678
|
|
|
|
4,616
|
|
Retained earnings
|
|
|
626,876
|
|
|
|
519,939
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
823,379
|
|
|
|
767,175
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity
|
|
$
|
1,167,797
|
|
|
$
|
1,128,185
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
F-3
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
(In
thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Revenues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
522,709
|
|
|
$
|
483,759
|
|
|
$
|
429,220
|
|
Collaborative research revenue
|
|
|
14,518
|
|
|
|
7,911
|
|
|
|
20,581
|
|
Royalty and license revenue
|
|
|
6,100
|
|
|
|
6,632
|
|
|
|
22,894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
543,327
|
|
|
|
498,302
|
|
|
|
472,695
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales (excluding acquisition-related intangible
amortization)
|
|
|
169,222
|
|
|
|
152,393
|
|
|
|
128,029
|
|
Acquisition-related intangible amortization
|
|
|
8,847
|
|
|
|
4,144
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
111,103
|
|
|
|
105,970
|
|
|
|
101,099
|
|
Marketing and sales
|
|
|
59,492
|
|
|
|
53,853
|
|
|
|
45,850
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
56,818
|
|
|
|
61,828
|
|
|
|
52,322
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
405,482
|
|
|
|
378,188
|
|
|
|
327,300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations
|
|
|
137,845
|
|
|
|
120,114
|
|
|
|
145,395
|
|
Other income (expense):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment and interest income
|
|
|
11,765
|
|
|
|
21,603
|
|
|
|
16,801
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(2,216
|
)
|
|
|
(1,857
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on contingent consideration
|
|
|
7,994
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
(177
|
)
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
|
(1,333
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income, net
|
|
|
17,366
|
|
|
|
19,688
|
|
|
|
15,468
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income tax
|
|
|
155,211
|
|
|
|
139,802
|
|
|
|
160,863
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
48,274
|
|
|
|
48,019
|
|
|
|
53,909
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
106,937
|
|
|
$
|
91,783
|
|
|
$
|
106,954
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
2.20
|
|
|
$
|
1.82
|
|
|
$
|
1.98
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
2.18
|
|
|
$
|
1.79
|
|
|
$
|
1.95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
48,560
|
|
|
|
50,356
|
|
|
|
53,740
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
49,033
|
|
|
|
50,965
|
|
|
|
54,785
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
F-4
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
(In
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Operating activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
106,937
|
|
|
$
|
91,783
|
|
|
$
|
106,954
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
44,529
|
|
|
|
40,382
|
|
|
|
34,715
|
|
Amortization of premiums on investments, net of accretion of
discounts
|
|
|
9,573
|
|
|
|
5,868
|
|
|
|
6,908
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
24,075
|
|
|
|
23,420
|
|
|
|
20,663
|
|
Excess tax benefit from employee stock-based compensation
|
|
|
(3,692
|
)
|
|
|
(2,005
|
)
|
|
|
(2,493
|
)
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
(1,808
|
)
|
|
|
812
|
|
|
|
(3,831
|
)
|
Deferred income tax
|
|
|
(3,745
|
)
|
|
|
(5,786
|
)
|
|
|
(2,788
|
)
|
Gain on contingent consideration
|
|
|
(7,994
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on sale of investment in MPI
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,600
|
)
|
Gain on sale of food safety business
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(291
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of intangible assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,086
|
|
Loss on disposal of property and equipment
|
|
|
1,065
|
|
|
|
221
|
|
|
|
55
|
|
Changes in assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade and other accounts receivable
|
|
|
2,649
|
|
|
|
(11,303
|
)
|
|
|
7,421
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(1,154
|
)
|
|
|
2,315
|
|
|
|
(5,367
|
)
|
Prepaid expenses
|
|
|
3,055
|
|
|
|
1,218
|
|
|
|
2,325
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
(360
|
)
|
|
|
1,912
|
|
|
|
(1,260
|
)
|
Other long-term assets
|
|
|
(559
|
)
|
|
|
(4,123
|
)
|
|
|
(173
|
)
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(6,265
|
)
|
|
|
3,500
|
|
|
|
4,377
|
|
Accrued salaries and employee benefits
|
|
|
(133
|
)
|
|
|
(676
|
)
|
|
|
4,125
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
|
(4,417
|
)
|
|
|
(806
|
)
|
|
|
101
|
|
Income tax payable
|
|
|
7,688
|
|
|
|
(2,371
|
)
|
|
|
2,777
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
|
961
|
|
|
|
258
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities
|
|
|
169,566
|
|
|
|
145,031
|
|
|
|
178,253
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales and maturities of marketable securities
|
|
|
427,821
|
|
|
|
438,601
|
|
|
|
353,234
|
|
Purchases of marketable securities
|
|
|
(401,434
|
)
|
|
|
(419,019
|
)
|
|
|
(445,931
|
)
|
Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(30,716
|
)
|
|
|
(32,364
|
)
|
|
|
(39,348
|
)
|
Purchases of capitalized software
|
|
|
(3,891
|
)
|
|
|
(1,290
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of intangible assets, including licenses and
manufacturing access fees
|
|
|
(2,513
|
)
|
|
|
(7,341
|
)
|
|
|
(11,970
|
)
|
Net cash paid for business combinations
|
|
|
(53,000
|
)
|
|
|
(183,725
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of food safety business
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,357
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of investment in MPI
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,100
|
|
Cash paid for investment in Pacific Biosciences
|
|
|
(50,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(820
|
)
|
|
|
403
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(114,471
|
)
|
|
|
(198,378
|
)
|
|
|
(139,888
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase and retirement of common stock
|
|
|
(99,935
|
)
|
|
|
(174,847
|
)
|
|
|
(74,970
|
)
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock and employee stock
purchase plan
|
|
|
31,830
|
|
|
|
10,923
|
|
|
|
20,472
|
|
Payment of contingent consideration
|
|
|
(10,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase and retirement of restricted stock for payment of
taxes
|
|
|
(1,257
|
)
|
|
|
(1,716
|
)
|
|
|
(1,529
|
)
|
Excess tax benefit from employee stock-based compensation
|
|
|
3,692
|
|
|
|
2,005
|
|
|
|
2,493
|
|
Borrowings, net
|
|
|
(228
|
)
|
|
|
238,450
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
|
|
(75,898
|
)
|
|
|
74,815
|
|
|
|
(53,534
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(2,123
|
)
|
|
|
1,026
|
|
|
|
(672
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(22,926
|
)
|
|
|
22,494
|
|
|
|
(15,841
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of period
|
|
|
82,616
|
|
|
|
60,122
|
|
|
|
75,963
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of period
|
|
$
|
59,690
|
|
|
$
|
82,616
|
|
|
$
|
60,122
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for interest
|
|
$
|
2,358
|
|
|
$
|
1,804
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for taxes
|
|
$
|
46,787
|
|
|
$
|
54,933
|
|
|
$
|
54,783
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
F-5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
(Loss)
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2007
|
|
|
53,916
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
415,229
|
|
|
$
|
1,604
|
|
|
$
|
321,202
|
|
|
$
|
738,040
|
|
Common stock issued from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
525
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,771
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16,771
|
|
Repurchase and retirement of common stock
|
|
|
(1,705
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(74,970
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(74,970
|
)
|
Purchase of common stock through employee stock purchase plan
|
|
|
98
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,701
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,701
|
|
Issuance of common stock to board members
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148
|
|
Issuance of restricted stock awards, net of cancellations
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of deferred issuance restricted stock awards
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase and retirement of restricted stock for payment of
taxes
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,529
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,529
|
)
|
Stock-based compensation charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,701
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,701
|
|
Stock-based compensation income tax benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,493
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,493
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
106,954
|
|
|
|
106,954
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(284
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(284
|
)
|
Change in net unrealized gain on marketable securities, net of
income tax benefits of $935
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,079
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,079
|
|
Reclassification of net realized gain on marketable securities,
net of income tax expense of $353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
656
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
656
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108,405
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2008
|
|
|
52,921
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
382,544
|
|
|
$
|
3,055
|
|
|
$
|
428,156
|
|
|
$
|
813,760
|
|
Common stock issued from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
374
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,828
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,828
|
|
Repurchase and retirement of common stock
|
|
|
(4,283
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(174,847
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(174,847
|
)
|
Purchase of common stock through employee stock purchase plan
|
|
|
112
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,095
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,095
|
|
Issuance of common stock to board members
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
176
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
176
|
|
Issuance of restricted stock awards, net of cancellations
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of deferred issuance restricted stock awards
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase and retirement of restricted stock for payment of
taxes
|
|
|
(42
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,716
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,716
|
)
|
Stock-based compensation charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,530
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,530
|
|
Stock-based compensation income tax benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,005
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91,783
|
|
|
|
91,783
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,705
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,705
|
|
Change in net unrealized loss on marketable securities, net of
income tax benefits of $616
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,981
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,981
|
)
|
Reclassification of net realized gain on marketable securities,
net of income tax expense of $3,681
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,837
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,837
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,344
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
49,144
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
242,615
|
|
|
$
|
4,616
|
|
|
$
|
519,939
|
|
|
$
|
767,175
|
|
Common stock issued from exercise of stock options
|
|
|
904
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,438
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,438
|
|
Repurchase and retirement of common stock
|
|
|
(2,165
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(99,935
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(99,935
|
)
|
Purchase of common stock through employee stock purchase plan
|
|
|
117
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,392
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,392
|
|
Issuance of common stock to board members
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
282
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
282
|
|
Cancellations of restricted stock awards
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase and retirement of restricted stock for payment of
taxes
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,257
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,257
|
)
|
Stock-based compensation charges
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,398
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,398
|
|
Stock-based compensation income tax benefits
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,113
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,113
|
)
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
106,937
|
|
|
|
106,937
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,665
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,665
|
)
|
Change in net unrealized loss on marketable securities, net of
income tax benefits of $1,186
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,644
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,644
|
)
|
Reclassification of net realized gain on marketable securities,
net of income tax expense of $2,353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,371
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,371
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
102,999
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
47,966
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
195,820
|
|
|
$
|
678
|
|
|
$
|
626,876
|
|
|
$
|
823,379
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
F-6
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
|
|
Note 1
|
Organization
and summary of significant accounting policies
|
Organization
and basis of presentation
Gen-Probe Incorporated (Gen-Probe or the
Company) is a global leader in the development,
manufacture and marketing of rapid, accurate and cost-effective
molecular diagnostic products and services that are used
primarily to diagnose human diseases, screen donated human
blood, and ensure transplant compatibility. The Companys
molecular diagnostic products are designed to detect diseases
more rapidly
and/or
accurately than older tests, and are among the fastest-growing
categories of the in vitro diagnostics
(IVD) industry.
In accordance with the Subsequent Events Topic of the Financial
Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting
Standards Codification (ASC), the Company evaluated
subsequent events after the balance sheet date of
December 31, 2010 and through the date and time its
consolidated financial statements were issued on
February 23, 2011.
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to
the current year presentation. Such reclassifications did not
affect total revenues, income from operations, or net income.
Principles
of consolidation
These consolidated financial statements include the accounts of
Gen-Probe as well as its wholly owned subsidiaries. The Company
does not have any interests in variable interest entities. All
material intercompany transactions and balances have been
eliminated in consolidation.
In December 2010, the Company completed its acquisition of
Genetic Testing Institute, Inc. (GTI Diagnostics), a
privately held Wisconsin corporation now known as Gen-Probe GTI
Diagnostics, Inc. GTI Diagnostics has broadened and strengthened
the Companys transplant diagnostics business, and has also
provided it access to new products in the specialty coagulation
and transfusion-related blood bank markets. GTI
Diagnostics business has been included in the
Companys clinical diagnostic operations beginning in
December 2010.
In October 2009, the Company acquired Prodesse, Inc.
(Prodesse), a privately held Wisconsin corporation,
now known as Gen-Probe Prodesse, Inc. Prodesse develops
molecular diagnostic products for a variety of infectious
disease applications. Prodesses results of operations have
been included in the Companys clinical diagnostic
operations beginning in October 2009.
In April 2009, the Company completed its acquisition of Tepnel
Life Sciences plc (Tepnel), a United Kingdom
(UK) based international life sciences products and
services company, now known as Gen-Probe Life Sciences Ltd.
Tepnels transplant diagnostics and genetic testing
businesses have been included in the Companys clinical
diagnostic operations beginning in April 2009. While
Tepnels research products and services business represents
a new area of business for the Company, the activities of this
business were immaterial to the Companys overall
operations during 2010 and 2009.
Use of
estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with
United States generally accepted accounting principles
(U.S. GAAP) requires management to make certain
estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in
the consolidated financial statements. These estimates include
assessing the collectability of accounts receivable, recognition
of revenues, and the valuation of the following: stock-based
compensation; marketable securities; equity investments in
publicly and privately held companies; income tax; liabilities
associated with employee benefit costs; inventories; and
goodwill and long-lived assets, including patent costs,
capitalized
F-7
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
software, purchased intangibles and licenses and manufacturing
access fees. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Foreign
currencies
The Company translates the financial statements of its
non-U.S. operations
using the
end-of-period
exchange rates for assets and liabilities and the average
exchange rates for each reporting period for results of
operations. Net gains and losses resulting from the translation
of foreign financial statements and the effect of exchange rates
on intercompany receivables and payables of a long-term
investment nature are recorded as a separate component of
stockholders equity under the caption Accumulated
other comprehensive income. These adjustments will affect
net income upon the sale or liquidation of the underlying
investment.
Segment
information
The Company currently operates in one business segment, the
development, manufacturing, marketing, sales and support of
molecular diagnostic products primarily to diagnose human
diseases and screen donated human blood. Although the
Companys products comprise distinct product lines to serve
different end markets within molecular diagnostics, the Company
does not operate its business in multiple business units or
operating segments. The Company is managed by a single
functionally based management team that manages all aspects of
the Companys business and reports directly to the Chief
Executive Officer. For all periods presented, the Company
operated in a single business segment. Revenue by product line
and geographic location is presented in Note 16.
Revenue
recognition
The Company records shipments of its clinical diagnostic
products as product sales when the product is shipped and title
and risk of loss have passed and when collection of the
resulting receivable is reasonably assured.
The Company manufactures blood screening products according to
demand schedules provided by its collaboration partner, Novartis
Vaccines and Diagnostics, Inc. (Novartis). Upon
shipment to Novartis, the Company recognizes blood screening
product sales at an agreed upon transfer price and records the
related cost of products sold. Based on the terms of the
Companys collaboration agreement with Novartis, the
Companys ultimate share of the net revenue from sales to
the end user is not known until reported to the Company by
Novartis. The Company then adjusts blood screening product sales
upon receipt of customer revenue reports and a net payment from
Novartis of amounts reflecting the Companys ultimate share
of net sales by Novartis for these products, less the transfer
price revenues previously recognized.
In most cases, the Company provides its instrumentation to its
clinical diagnostics customers without requiring them to
purchase the equipment or enter into an equipment lease.
Instead, the Company recovers the cost of providing the
instrumentation in the amount it charges for its diagnostic
assays. The depreciation costs associated with an instrument are
charged to cost of product sales on a straight-line basis over
the estimated life of the instrument. The costs to maintain
these instruments in the field are charged to cost of product
sales as incurred.
The Company sells its instruments to Novartis for use in blood
screening and records these instrument sales upon delivery since
Novartis is responsible for the placement, maintenance and
repair of the units with its customers. The Company also sells
instruments to its clinical diagnostics customers and records
sales of these instruments upon delivery and receipt of customer
acceptance. Prior to delivery, each instrument is tested to meet
Gen-Probes and United States Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) specifications, and is shipped fully
assembled. Customer acceptance of the Companys clinical
diagnostic instrument systems requires installation and training
by the Companys technical service personnel. Installation
is a standard process consisting principally of uncrating,
calibrating and testing the instrumentation.
The Company records revenue on its research products and
services in the period during which the related costs are
incurred, or services are provided. This revenue consists of
outsourcing services for the pharmaceutical,
F-8
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
biotechnology and healthcare industries, including nucleic acid
purification and analysis services, as well as the sale of
monoclonal antibodies.
The Company analyzes each element of its collaborative
arrangements to determine the appropriate revenue recognition.
The Company recognizes revenue on up-front payments over the
period of significant involvement under the related agreements
unless the fee is in exchange for products delivered or services
rendered that represent the culmination of a separate earnings
process and no further performance obligation exists under the
contract.
Revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables are divided into
separate units of accounting if (i) the delivered item has
stand-alone value, (ii) the vendor has objective and
reliable evidence of the fair value of the undelivered item(s),
and (iii) the customer has a general right of return
relative to the delivered item(s) and delivery or performance of
the undelivered item(s) is probable and substantially within the
vendors control. All of these criteria must be met in
order for a delivered item to be accounted for as a separate
unit.
The Company recognizes collaborative research revenue over the
term of various collaboration agreements, as negotiated monthly
contracted amounts are earned or reimbursable costs are incurred
related to those agreements. Negotiated monthly contracted
amounts are earned in relative proportion to the performance
required under the applicable contracts. Non-refundable license
fees are recognized over the related performance period or at
the time that the Company has satisfied all performance
obligations. Milestone payments are recognized as revenue upon
the achievement of specified milestones when (i) the
Company has earned the milestone payment, (ii) the
milestone is substantive in nature and the achievement of the
milestone is not reasonably assured at the inception of the
agreement, (iii) the fees are non-refundable, and
(iv) performance obligations after the milestone
achievement will continue to be funded by the collaborator at a
level comparable to the level before the milestone achievement.
Any amounts received prior to satisfying the Companys
revenue recognition criteria are recorded as deferred revenue on
its consolidated balance sheets.
Royalty and license revenue is recognized related to the sale or
use of the Companys products or technologies under license
agreements with third parties. For those arrangements where
royalties are reasonably estimable, the Company recognizes
revenue based on estimates of royalties earned during the
applicable period and adjusts for differences between the
estimated and actual royalties in the following period.
Historically, these adjustments have not been material. For
those arrangements where royalties are not reasonably estimable,
the Company recognizes revenue upon receipt of royalty
statements from the applicable licensee.
Cost
of product sales
Cost of product sales reflects the costs applicable to products
shipped for which product sales revenue is recognized in
accordance with the Companys revenue recognition policy.
The Company manufactures products for commercial sale as well as
development stage products for internal use or clinical
evaluation. The Company classifies costs for commercial products
to Cost of product sales and costs for internal use
or clinical evaluations to Research and development
costs.
The Company does not separately track all of the costs
applicable to collaborative research revenue, as there is not a
distinction between the Companys internal development
activities and the development efforts made pursuant to
agreements with third parties. The costs associated with
collaborative research revenue are based on fully burdened full
time equivalent rates and are reflected in the Companys
consolidated statements of income under the captions
Research and development, Marketing and
sales, and General and administrative, based
on the nature of the costs.
Stock-based
compensation
Stock-based compensation cost is measured at the grant date,
based on the estimated fair value of the award, and is
recognized as expense over the employees requisite service
period. Stock-based compensation expense is recognized based on
the value of share-based payment awards that are ultimately
expected to vest, which coincides
F-9
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
with the award holders requisite service period. Certain
of these costs are capitalized into inventory on the
Companys consolidated balance sheets, and are recognized
as an expense when the related products are sold.
Advertising
costs
Advertising costs are expensed as incurred and are recorded
within marketing and sales expenses. Advertising costs were
$0.6 million, $0.8 million, and $1.1 million for
the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008,
respectively.
Shipping
and handling expenses
Shipping and handling expenses included in cost of product sales
totaled approximately $7.9 million, $7.3 million and
$6.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2010,
2009 and 2008, respectively.
Contingencies
Contingent gains are not recorded in the Companys
consolidated financial statements since this accounting
treatment could result in the recognition of gains that might
never be realized. Contingent losses are only recorded in the
Companys consolidated financial statements if it is
probable that a loss will result from a contingency and the
amount can be reasonably estimated.
Income
tax
The asset and liability approach is used to recognize deferred
tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax
consequences of temporary differences between the carrying
amounts and the tax bases of assets and liabilities. The impact
of tax law and rate changes is reflected in income in the period
such changes are enacted. As needed, the Company records a
valuation allowance to reduce the deferred tax assets to the
amount that is more likely than not to be realized based on
expected future taxable income.
The Companys income tax returns are based on calculations
and assumptions that are subject to examination by various tax
authorities. While the Company believes it has appropriate
support for the positions taken on its tax returns, the Company
regularly assesses the potential outcomes of these examinations
and any future examinations in determining the adequacy of its
provision for income taxes. As part of its assessment of
potential adjustments to its tax returns, the Company increases
its current tax liability to the extent an adjustment would
result in a cash tax payment or decreases its deferred tax
assets to the extent an adjustment would not result in a cash
tax payment. The Company reviews, at least quarterly, the
likelihood and amount of potential adjustments and adjusts the
income tax provision, the current tax liability and deferred
taxes in the period in which the facts that give rise to a
revision become probable and estimable.
Net
income per share
Basic earnings per share is computed using the two-class method.
Under the two-class method, net income is allocated to common
stock and participating securities. The Companys
restricted stock, deferred issuance restricted stock and
performance stock awards meet the definition of participating
securities. Basic net income per share is computed by dividing
net income adjusted for earnings allocated to unvested
stockholders for the period by the weighted average number of
common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net income
per share is computed by dividing net income adjusted for
earnings allocated to unvested stockholders for the period by
the weighted average number of common and common equivalent
shares outstanding during the period. The Company excludes stock
options from the calculation of diluted net income per share
when the combined exercise price, average unamortized fair
values and assumed tax benefits upon exercise are greater than
the average market price for the Companys common stock
because their effect is anti-dilutive. Potentially dilutive
securities totaling approximately 3,840,000, 3,926,000 and
2,448,000 for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008,
F-10
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
respectively, were excluded from the calculations of diluted
earnings per share (EPS) below because of their
anti-dilutive effect.
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and
diluted EPS for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008 (in thousands, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Per Share
|
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Outstanding
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
$
|
106,937
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
91,783
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
106,954
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Earnings allocated to unvested stockholders
|
|
|
(273
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(335
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(358
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic EPS
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributable income available to common stockholders
|
|
|
106,664
|
|
|
|
48,560
|
|
|
$
|
2.20
|
|
|
|
91,448
|
|
|
|
50,356
|
|
|
$
|
1.82
|
|
|
|
106,596
|
|
|
|
53,740
|
|
|
$
|
1.98
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of dilutive securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add back: Undistributed earnings allocated to unvested
stockholders
|
|
|
273
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
335
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
358
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilutive stock options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
473
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
609
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,045
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Undistributed earnings reallocated to unvested stockholders
|
|
|
(270
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(331
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(351
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted EPS Common stock
|
|
$
|
106,667
|
|
|
|
49,033
|
|
|
$
|
2.18
|
|
|
$
|
91,452
|
|
|
|
50,965
|
|
|
$
|
1.79
|
|
|
$
|
106,603
|
|
|
|
54,785
|
|
|
$
|
1.95
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents consist primarily of highly liquid
cash investment funds with original maturities of three months
or less when acquired.
Marketable
securities
The primary objectives of the Companys marketable debt
security investment portfolio are liquidity and safety of
principal. Investments are made with the goal of achieving the
highest rate of return consistent with these two objectives. The
Companys investment policy limits investments to certain
types of debt and money market instruments issued by
institutions primarily with investment grade credit ratings and
places restrictions on maturities and concentration by type and
issuer.
Marketable debt and equity securities are carried at fair value,
with unrealized gains and losses, net of tax, reported as a
separate component of stockholders equity under the
caption Accumulated other comprehensive income. The
amortized cost of debt securities is adjusted for amortization
of premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity. Such
amortization is included in Investment and interest
income.
Realized gains and losses, and declines in value judged to be
other-than-temporary
on marketable debt and equity securities, are included in
Investment and interest income. The cost of
securities sold is based on the specific identification method.
Interest and dividends on securities classified as
available-for-sale
are included in Investment and interest income.
The Company periodically reviews its marketable debt and equity
securities for
other-than-temporary
declines in fair value below their cost basis, or whenever
events or circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an
asset may not be recoverable. When assessing marketable debt and
equity securities for
other-than-temporary
F-11
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
declines in value, the Company considers factors including: the
significance of the decline in value compared to the cost basis;
the underlying factors contributing to a decline in the prices
of securities in a single asset class; how long the market value
of the investment has been less than its cost basis; any market
conditions that impact liquidity; the views of external
investment managers; any news or financial information that has
been released specific to the investee; and the outlook for the
overall industry in which the investee operates.
The Company does not consider its investments in marketable debt
and equity securities with a current unrealized loss position to
be
other-than-temporarily
impaired at December 31, 2010 because the Company does not
intend to sell the investments and it is not more likely than
not that the Company will be required to sell the investments
before recovery of their amortized cost. However, investments in
an unrealized loss position deemed to be temporary at
December 31, 2010 that have a contractual maturity of
greater than 12 months have been classified as non-current
marketable securities under the caption Marketable
securities, net of current portion, reflecting the
Companys current intent and ability to hold such
investments to maturity. The Companys investments in
marketable debt securities and marketable equity securities are
classified as
available-for-sale.
Fair
value of financial instruments
The carrying value of cash equivalents, marketable securities,
accounts receivable, accounts payable and accrued liabilities
approximates fair value. See Note 8 for further discussion
of fair value.
Accounts
receivable
Accounts receivable are recorded at the invoiced amount and are
non-interest bearing. The Company maintains an allowance for
doubtful accounts for estimated losses resulting from the
inability of its customers to make required payments. Credit
losses historically have been minimal and within
managements expectations. If the financial condition of
the Companys customers were to deteriorate, resulting in
an impairment of the customers ability to make payments,
additional allowances would be required.
Concentration
of credit risk
The Company sells its diagnostic products primarily to
established large reference laboratories, public health
institutions and hospitals. Credit is extended based on an
evaluation of the customers financial condition and
generally collateral is not required.
Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to
concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash, cash
equivalents, and marketable debt securities. The Company limits
its exposure to credit loss by placing its cash with high credit
quality financial institutions. The Company generally invests
its excess cash in investment grade municipal securities. The
Companys marketable securities are presented in
Note 7.
Inventories
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost,
which includes amounts related to materials and labor and
overhead, is determined in a manner which approximates the
first-in,
first-out method. A reserve is recorded for excess and obsolete
inventory based on managements review of inventories on
hand, compared to estimated future usage and sales, shelf-life
and assumptions about the likelihood of obsolescence.
F-12
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Property,
plant and equipment
Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation
of property, plant and equipment is provided using the
straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the
assets as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years
|
|
Building
|
|
|
10-50
|
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
3-8
|
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
3
|
|
Depreciation expense was $26.8 million, $27.6 million
and $26.5 million for the years ended December 31,
2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively. Amortization of building
improvements is provided over the shorter of the remaining life
of the lease or the estimated useful life of the asset.
Asset
retirement obligations
Obligations recorded are associated with the retirement of
tangible long-lived assets related to leased facilities and the
associated asset retirement costs. The Company records the fair
value of a liability for an asset retirement obligation in the
period in which it is incurred if a reasonable estimate of fair
value can be made. In addition, the asset retirement cost is
capitalized as part of the assets carrying value and
subsequently expensed over the assets useful life. The
Companys consolidated balance sheets at December 31,
2010 and 2009 included asset retirement obligations of
$0.5 million and $0, respectively.
Patent
costs
The Company capitalizes the costs incurred to file and prosecute
patent applications. The Company amortizes these costs on a
straight-line basis over the lesser of the remaining useful life
of the related technology or eight years. Capitalized patent
costs are included in License, manufacturing access fees
and other assets, net on the consolidated balance sheets.
All costs related to abandoned patent applications are recorded
as General and administrative expenses.
Capitalized
software costs
The Company capitalizes costs incurred in the development of
computer software related to products under development after
establishment of technological feasibility. These capitalized
costs are recorded at the lower of unamortized cost or net
realizable value and are amortized over the estimated life of
the related product or ten years.
Intangible
assets
The Company capitalizes license fee payments that relate to
approved products and acquired intangibles with alternative
future uses.
The Company capitalizes manufacturing access fees that it pays
when (i) the fee embodies a probable future benefit that
involves a capacity, singly or in combination with other assets,
to contribute directly or indirectly to future net cash inflows,
(ii) the Company can obtain the benefit and control
others access to it, and (iii) the transaction or
other event giving rise to the entitys right to or control
of the benefit has already occurred.
Intangible assets that the Company acquires are initially
recognized and measured based on their fair value. The Company
uses the present value technique of estimated future cash flows
to measure the fair value of assets at the date of acquisition.
Those cash flow estimates incorporate assumptions based on
historical experience with selling similar products in the
marketplace. The useful life of an intangible asset to an entity
is the period over which the asset is expected to contribute
directly or indirectly to the future cash flows of that entity.
The Company
F-13
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
amortizes the capitalized intangible assets over the remaining
economic life of the relevant technology using the straight-line
method, which currently ranges from 2 to 20 years.
Impairment
of long-lived assets
The Companys business acquisitions typically result in the
recording of goodwill and other intangible assets, and the
recorded values of those assets may become impaired in the
future. The Company also acquires intangible assets in other
types of transactions. As of December 31, 2010, the
Companys goodwill and intangible assets (excluding
capitalized software), net of accumulated amortization, were
$150.3 million and $173.0 million, respectively. The
determination of the value of such intangible assets requires
management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the
Companys consolidated financial statements. For intangible
assets purchased in a business combination, the estimated fair
values of the assets acquired are used to establish their
recorded values. Valuation techniques consistent with the market
approach, income approach
and/or cost
approach are used to measure fair value. An estimate of fair
value can be affected by many assumptions which require
significant judgment. For example, the income approach requires
assumptions related to the appropriate business model to be used
to estimate cash flows, total addressable market, pricing and
share forecasts, competition, technology obsolescence, future
tax rates and discount rates. The Companys estimates of
the fair value of certain assets, or its conclusion that the
value of certain assets is not reliably estimable, may differ
materially from determinations made by others who use different
assumptions or utilize different business models. New
information may arise in the future that affects the
Companys fair value estimates and could result in
adjustments to its estimates in the future, which could have an
adverse impact on its results of operations.
The Company assesses the impairment of goodwill and long-lived
assets whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that
the carrying value may not be recoverable. Impairment is
reviewed at least annually, and occurs at the same time in the
fourth quarter of each year, unless circumstances indicate that
impairment has occurred before the fourth quarter of any given
year. The Company completed its impairment test in the fourth
quarter of 2010 and determined that the fair value of goodwill
and long-lived assets exceeded the carrying value and therefore
no impairment loss was necessary.
Factors the Company considers important that could trigger an
impairment, include the following:
|
|
|
|
|
significant underperformance relative to historical or projected
future operating results;
|
|
|
|
significant changes in the manner of the Companys use of
the acquired assets or the strategy for its overall business;
|
|
|
|
significant negative industry or economic trends;
|
|
|
|
significant declines in the Companys stock price for a
sustained period; and
|
|
|
|
decreased market capitalization relative to net book value.
|
When there is an indication that the carrying value of goodwill
or a long-lived asset may not be recoverable based upon the
existence of one or more of the above indicators or other
factors, an impairment loss is recognized if the carrying amount
exceeds its fair value. Any resulting impairment loss could have
an adverse impact on the Companys operating expenses.
The Companys impairment analysis requires management to
make assumptions and to apply judgment to estimate future cash
flows and asset fair values, including estimating the
profitability of future business strategies. The Company has not
made any material changes in its impairment assessment
methodology during the past three fiscal years. The Company does
not believe there is a reasonable likelihood that there will be
a material change in the estimates or assumptions it uses to
calculate long-lived asset impairment losses. However, if actual
results are not consistent with the Companys estimates and
assumptions used in estimating future cash flows and asset fair
values, the Company may be exposed to losses that could be
material.
F-14
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
During the year ended December 31, 2008, due to certain
indicators of impairment, the Company recorded impairment
charges totaling $5.1 million related to its equity
investment in Qualigen, Inc. and its license agreement with
Corixa Corporation (Corixa). See Notes 8 and 9,
respectively, for a complete discussion of the impairment
analysis.
Self-insurance
reserves
The Companys consolidated balance sheets at each of
December 31, 2010 and 2009 include approximately
$1.3 million of liabilities associated with employee
medical costs that are retained by the Company. The Company
estimates the required liability of such claims on an
undiscounted basis based upon various assumptions which include,
but are not limited to, the Companys historical loss
experience and projected loss development factors. The required
liability is also subject to adjustment in the future based upon
changes in claims experience, including changes in the number of
incidents (frequency) and change in the ultimate cost per
incident (severity).
Accumulated
other comprehensive income
All components of comprehensive income, including net income,
are reported in the consolidated financial statements in the
period in which they are recognized. Comprehensive income is
defined as the change in equity during a period from
transactions and other events and circumstances from non-owner
sources. Net income and other comprehensive income, which
includes certain changes in stockholders equity such as
foreign currency translation of the Companys wholly owned
subsidiaries financial statements and unrealized gains and
losses on its
available-for-sale
securities, are reported, net of their related tax effect, to
arrive at comprehensive income.
Pending
adoption of recent accounting pronouncements
Accounting
Standards Update
2010-06
In January 2010, the FASB amended ASC Topic 820, Fair Value
Measurements and Disclosures, to require reporting entities to
make new disclosures about recurring and non-recurring fair
value measurements, including significant transfers into and out
of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value measurements and
information about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements
on a gross basis in the reconciliation of Level 3 fair
value measurements. Except for the detailed Level 3 roll
forward disclosures, the guidance was effective January 1,
2010. The new disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances, and
settlements in the roll forward activity for Level 3 fair
value measurements are effective for the Company as of
January 1, 2011. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption
of this standard will not impact the Companys financial
position or results of operations.
Accounting
Standards Update
2010-17
In March 2010, the FASB ratified the final consensus that offers
an alternative method of revenue recognition for milestone
payments. The guidance states that an entity can make an
accounting policy election to recognize a payment that is
contingent upon the achievement of a substantive milestone in
its entirety in the period in which the milestone is achieved.
The guidance will be effective for fiscal years, and interim
periods within those years, beginning on or after June 15,
2010 with early adoption permitted, provided that the revised
guidance is applied retrospectively to the beginning of the year
of adoption. The guidance may be applied retrospectively or
prospectively for milestones achieved after the adoption date.
The Company has elected to apply this guidance prospectively and
determined that the adoption of this guidance will not have a
material effect on its consolidated financial statements.
Accounting
Standards Update
2009-13
In September 2009, the FASB revised the authoritative guidance
for revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables. The
guidance addresses how to determine whether an arrangement
involving multiple deliverables
F-15
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
contains more than one unit of accounting and how the
arrangement consideration should be allocated among the separate
units of accounting. The guidance will be effective for the
Companys fiscal year beginning January 1, 2011 with
early adoption permitted. The guidance may be applied
retrospectively or prospectively for new or materially modified
arrangements. The Company has elected to apply this guidance
prospectively and determined that the adoption of this guidance
will not have a material effect on its consolidated financial
statements.
|
|
Note 2
|
Business
combinations
|
The acquisitions below were accounted for as business
combinations and, accordingly, the Company has included the
results of operations of the acquired entities in its
consolidated statements of income from the date of acquisition.
Neither separate financial statements nor pro forma results of
operations have been presented because the acquisitions do not
meet the quantitative materiality tests under
Regulation S-X.
Acquisition
of GTI Diagnostics
In December 2010, the Company acquired GTI Diagnostics, a
privately held specialty diagnostics company focused on the
transplantation, specialty coagulation and transfusion-related
blood bank markets, for $53.0 million on a net-cash basis.
As a result of the acquisition, GTI Diagnostics became a
wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. The Company financed the
acquisition through existing cash on hand.
The purchase price allocation for the acquisition of GTI
Diagnostics set forth below is preliminary and subject to change
as more detailed analysis is completed and additional
information with respect to the fair value of the assets and
liabilities acquired becomes available. The Company expects to
finalize the purchase price allocation during fiscal year 2011.
The preliminary allocation of the purchase price for the
Companys acquisition of GTI Diagnostics is as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase price
|
|
$
|
53,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net working capital
|
|
$
|
7,881
|
|
Fixed assets
|
|
|
1,001
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
28,005
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(11,137
|
)
|
Other intangible assets
|
|
|
32,100
|
|
Liabilities assumed
|
|
|
(4,850
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allocated purchase price
|
|
$
|
53,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fair values of the acquired identifiable intangible assets
with definite lives are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Patents
|
|
$
|
10,600
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
11,900
|
|
Customer relationships
|
|
|
3,500
|
|
Trade secrets
|
|
|
6,100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
32,100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amortization periods for the acquired intangible assets with
definite lives are as follows: six to nine years for patents,
ten years for customer relationships, 20 years for trade
secrets, and an estimated life to be determined for each
in-process research and development product (to commence upon
commercialization of the associated product). The Company is
amortizing the acquired intangible assets set forth in the table
above using the straight-line method of amortization. The
Company believes that the use of the straight line method is
appropriate given the high customer retention rate of the
acquired business and the historical and projected growth of
revenues and related
F-16
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
cash flows. The Company will monitor and assess the acquired
intangible assets and will adjust, if necessary, the expected
life, amortization method or carrying value of such assets to
best match the underlying economic value.
The fair value assigned to trade secrets has been determined
primarily by using the income approach and a variation of the
income approach known as the relief from royalty method, which
estimates the future royalties which would have to be paid to
the owner of the brand for its current use. Tax is deducted and
a discount rate is used to state future cash flows to a present
value. This is based on the brand in its current use and is
based on savings from owning the brand, or relief from royalties
that would be paid to the brand owner. The fair value assigned
to patents, in-process research and development, and customer
relationships has been determined primarily by using the income
approach and a variation of the income approach known as the
excess earnings method, which estimates the value of an asset
based on discounted future earnings specifically attributed to
that asset, that is, in excess of returns for other assets that
contributed to those earnings. The discount rates used in these
valuation methods ranged from 13 to 16 percent.
The estimated amortization expense for the identifiable
intangible assets over future periods, excluding the in-process
research and development assets due to uncertainty with respect
to the commercialization of such assets, is as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
$
|
1,983
|
|
2012
|
|
|
1,983
|
|
2013
|
|
|
1,983
|
|
2014
|
|
|
1,983
|
|
2015
|
|
|
1,983
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
10,285
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
20,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
of Prodesse, Inc.
In October 2009, the Company acquired Prodesse, a privately held
Wisconsin corporation, for approximately $60.0 million,
subject to a designated pre-closing operating income adjustment,
and up to an aggregate of $25.0 million in potential
additional cash payments based on the achievement of certain
specified performance measures. As a result of the failure to
achieve a specified milestone, the maximum amount of contingent
consideration the Company may be required to pay for its
acquisition of Prodesse has been reduced to $15.0 million,
of which $10.0 million was paid in July 2010. Further
information regarding the contingent consideration can be found
in Note 8 Fair value measurements. As a result
of the acquisition, Prodesse (which is now known as Gen-Probe
Prodesse, Inc.) became a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company.
The Company financed the acquisition through existing cash on
hand.
F-17
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The final allocation of the purchase price for the acquisition
of Prodesse is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase price
|
|
$
|
62,005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net working capital
|
|
$
|
10,240
|
|
Fixed assets
|
|
|
644
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
32,981
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(21,369
|
)
|
Other intangible assets
|
|
|
58,570
|
|
Liabilities assumed
|
|
|
(1,067
|
)
|
Contingent consideration
|
|
|
(17,994
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allocated purchase price
|
|
$
|
62,005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fair values of the acquired identifiable intangible assets
with definite lives are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
In-process research and development
|
|
$
|
1,070
|
|
Developed technology
|
|
|
24,500
|
|
Customer relationships
|
|
|
31,800
|
|
Trademarks / trade names
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
58,570
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amortization periods for the acquired intangible assets with
definite lives are as follows: five years for in-process
research and development, 12 years for developed
technology, 12 years for customer relationships, and
20 years for trademarks and trade names. The Company is
amortizing the acquired intangible assets set forth in the table
above using the straight-line method of amortization. The
Company believes that the use of the straight-line method is
appropriate given the high customer retention rate of the
acquired business and the historical and projected growth of
revenues and related cash flows. The Company will monitor and
assess the acquired intangible assets and will adjust, if
necessary, the expected life, amortization method or carrying
value of such assets to best match the underlying economic value.
The fair value assigned to trademarks and trade names and
developed technology has been determined primarily by using the
income approach and a variation of the income approach known as
the relief from royalty method, which estimates the future
royalties which would have to be paid to the owner of the brand
for its current use. Tax is deducted and a discount rate is used
to state future cash flows to a present value. This is based on
the brand in its current use and is based on savings from owning
the brand, or relief from royalties that would be paid to the
brand owner. The fair value assigned to in-process research and
development and customer relationships has been determined
primarily by using the income approach and a variation of the
income approach known as the excess earnings method, which
estimates the value of an asset based on discounted future
earnings specifically attributed to that asset, that is, in
excess of returns for other assets that contributed to those
earnings. The discount rates used in these valuation methods
ranged from 25 to 30 percent.
In addition to acquiring Prodesses existing products, the
Company also acquired other products that can be classified as
next generation products, which were in the process of being
developed. Overall, a value of approximately $1.1 million
was capitalized and classified as in-process research and
development for the products under development. The Company has
incurred a total of approximately $2.2 million in research
and development expenses since the acquisition of Prodesse,
which includes these development activities related to next
generation products. In December 2010, one of the products
included within the in-process research and development
intangible asset, ProAdeno+, was approved by the FDA for
commercial use and the Company began selling the product. The
Company commenced amortizing the in-process research and
development intangible asset related to this product in December
2010 upon FDA approval.
F-18
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The estimated amortization expense for the identifiable
intangible assets over future periods is as follows
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
$
|
4,966
|
|
2012
|
|
|
4,966
|
|
2013
|
|
|
4,966
|
|
2014
|
|
|
4,966
|
|
2015
|
|
|
4,948
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
28,197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
53,009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition
of Tepnel Life Sciences plc
In April 2009, the Company acquired Tepnel, a UK-based
international life sciences products and services company, now
known as Gen-Probe Life Sciences Ltd., which has two principal
businesses, molecular diagnostics and research products and
services. As a result of the acquisition, Tepnel became a
wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company.
Upon consummation of the acquisition, each issued ordinary share
of Tepnel was cancelled and converted into the right to receive
27.1 pence in cash, or approximately $0.40 based on the then
applicable Great Britain Pound (GBP) to United
States Dollar (USD) exchange rate. In connection
with the acquisition, the holders of issued and outstanding
Tepnel capital stock, options and warrants received total net
cash of approximately £92.8 million, or approximately
$137.1 million based on the then applicable GBP to USD
exchange rate. The acquisition was financed through amounts
borrowed by the Company under a senior secured revolving credit
facility established between the Company and Bank of America,
N.A. (Bank of America).
The final allocation of the purchase price for the acquisition
of Tepnel is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase price
|
|
$
|
137,093
|
|
Exchange rate differences
|
|
|
(568
|
)(1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allocated purchase price
|
|
$
|
136,525
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net working capital
|
|
$
|
14,811
|
|
Fixed assets
|
|
|
11,352
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
70,395
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(14,148
|
)
|
Other intangible assets
|
|
|
57,497
|
|
Liabilities assumed
|
|
|
(3,382
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allocated purchase price
|
|
$
|
136,525
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Difference caused by exchange rate fluctuations between the date
of acquisition and the date funds were wired. |
F-19
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The fair values of the acquired identifiable intangible assets
with definite lives are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Patents
|
|
$
|
294
|
|
Software
|
|
|
441
|
|
Customer relationships
|
|
|
45,439
|
|
Trademarks / trade names
|
|
|
11,323
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
57,497
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amortization periods for the acquired intangible assets with
definite lives are as follows: ten years for patents, five years
for software, 12 years for customer relationships, and
20 years for trademarks and trade names. The Company plans
to amortize the primary acquired intangible assets, including
the customer relationships and trademarks and trade names, using
the straight-line method of amortization. The Company believes
that the use of the straight-line method is appropriate given
the high customer retention rate of the acquired businesses and
the historical and projected growth of revenues and related cash
flows. The Company will monitor and assess the acquired customer
relationships and will adjust, if necessary, the expected life,
amortization method or carrying value of the customer
relationships and trademarks and trade names, to best match the
underlying economic value.
The fair value assigned to trademarks and trade names has been
determined primarily by using the income approach and a
variation of the income approach known as the relief from
royalty method, which estimates the future royalties which would
have to be paid to the owner of the brand for its current use.
Tax is deducted and a discount rate is used to state future cash
flows to a present value. This is based on the brand in its
current use and is based on savings from owning the brand, or
relief from royalties that would be paid to the brand owner. The
fair value assigned to customer relationships has been
determined primarily by using the income approach and a
variation of the income approach known as the excess earnings
method, which estimates the value of an asset based on
discounted future earnings specifically attributed to that
asset, that is, in excess of returns for other assets that
contributed to those earnings. The fair value assigned to
assembled workforce and software has been determined primarily
by using the cost approach and a variation of the cost approach
known as the cost to recreate method, which represents the cost
to recreate the workforce and software at the valuation date.
The fair value assigned to patents has been determined primarily
by using the income approach and a variation of the income
approach known as the discounted cash flow method, which
estimates the value based on the present value of the after-tax
free cash flows attributable to owning the intangible asset. The
discount rates used in these valuation methods ranged from 12 to
13 percent.
The estimated amortization expense for the identifiable
intangible assets over future periods is as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
$
|
4,162
|
|
2012
|
|
|
4,162
|
|
2013
|
|
|
4,162
|
|
2014
|
|
|
4,095
|
|
2015
|
|
|
4,073
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
25,650
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
46,304
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes
in goodwill resulting from acquisitions
The $53.0 million purchase price for GTI Diagnostics
exceeded the value of the acquired tangible and identifiable
intangible assets, and therefore the Company allocated
$28.0 million to goodwill. Included in this initial
F-20
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
goodwill amount was $11.1 million primarily related to
deferred tax liabilities recorded as a result of non-deductible
amortization of acquired intangible assets.
The $62.0 million purchase price for Prodesse exceeded the
value of the acquired tangible and identifiable intangible
assets, and therefore the Company allocated $33.0 million
to goodwill. Included in this initial goodwill amount was
$21.4 million primarily related to deferred tax liabilities
recorded as a result of non-deductible amortization of acquired
intangible assets.
The $137.1 million purchase price for Tepnel exceeded the
value of the acquired tangible and identifiable intangible
assets, and therefore the Company allocated $70.4 million
to goodwill. Included in this initial goodwill amount was
$14.1 million primarily related to deferred tax liabilities
recorded as a result of non-deductible amortization of acquired
intangible assets.
Changes in goodwill for the twelve months ended
December 31, 2010 were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill balance as of December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
122,680
|
|
Additional goodwill recognized
|
|
|
28,005
|
|
Changes due to foreign currency translation
|
|
|
(377
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill balance as of December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
150,308
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 3
|
Consolidation
of UK operations
|
Due to the acquisition of Tepnel in April 2009, the Company now
has four locations in the UK: Manchester, Cardiff, Livingston,
and Abingdon. In order to accommodate the anticipated growth in
the business and to optimize expenses, the Company decided to
consolidate its UK operations to Manchester and Livingston. This
consolidation was communicated internally in May 2010.
Consolidation activities related to the employees and facilities
were accounted for under ASC Topic 420, Exit or Disposal Costs
(ASC 420). The Company estimates that expenses
related to this consolidation will total approximately
$3.9 million and be incurred over a two-year period, as the
consolidation will occur in phases. These expenses will include
termination costs, including severance costs related to the
elimination of certain redundant positions, and relocation costs
for certain key employees, and site closure costs.
During the year ended December 31, 2010, the Company
recorded approximately $0.5 million and $0.6 million
of termination costs and site closure costs, respectively. These
amounts are included in general and administrative expenses in
the Companys consolidated statements of income.
The following table summarizes the restructuring activities
accounted for under ASC 420 for the year ended
December 31, 2010, as well as the remaining restructuring
accrual recorded on the Companys consolidated balance
sheets at December 31, 2010 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination
|
|
|
Site Closure
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs
|
|
|
Costs
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Restructuring reserves at December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Charged to expenses
|
|
|
496
|
|
|
|
625
|
|
|
|
1,121
|
|
Amounts paid
|
|
|
(207
|
)
|
|
|
(547
|
)
|
|
|
(754
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring reserves at December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
287
|
|
|
$
|
78
|
|
|
$
|
365
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-21
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
Note 4
|
Spin-off
of industrial testing assets to Roka Bioscience, Inc.
|
In September 2009, the Company spun-off its industrial testing
assets, including the Closed Unit Dose Assay (CUDA)
system, to Roka Bioscience, Inc. (Roka), a newly
formed private company focused on developing rapid, highly
accurate molecular assays for biopharmaceutical production,
water and food safety testing, and other applications. In
consideration for the contribution of assets, the Company
received shares of preferred stock representing 19.9% of
Rokas capital stock on a fully diluted basis.
In addition to the CUDA system, the Company contributed to Roka
other industrial assets and the right to use certain of its
technologies and related know-how in certain industrial markets.
These markets include biopharmaceutical production, water and
food safety testing, veterinary testing, environmental testing
and bioterrorism testing. Roka also has rights to develop
certain infection control tests for use on the CUDA system.
The Company will receive royalties on any potential Roka product
sales, and retains rights to use the CUDA system for clinical
diagnostic applications. In addition, the Company is providing
contract manufacturing and certain other services to Roka on a
transitional basis.
The Company determined that Roka is not a variable interest
entity and therefore is not included in the Companys
consolidated financial statements.
|
|
Note 5
|
Stock-based
compensation
|
Stock-based compensation expense for restricted stock, deferred
issuance restricted stock and performance stock awards is
measured based on the closing fair market value of the
Companys common stock on the date of grant. The Company
uses the Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing model to value
stock options granted. The determination of the fair value of
share-based payment awards on the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes-Merton model is affected by the Companys
stock price and the implied volatility on its traded options, as
well as the input of other subjective assumptions. These
assumptions include, but are not limited to, the expected term
of stock options and the Companys expected stock price
volatility over the term of the awards.
The Company used the following weighted average assumptions to
estimate the fair value of stock options granted under the
Companys equity incentive plans and the shares purchasable
under the Companys Employee Stock Purchase Plan
(ESPP) and the resulting average fair values were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
2010
|
|
2009
|
|
2008
|
|
Stock Option Plans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
|
|
2.0
|
%
|
|
|
3.0
|
%
|
Volatility
|
|
|
32
|
%
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected term (years)
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Resulting average fair value
|
|
$
|
12.85
|
|
|
$
|
12.64
|
|
|
$
|
18.36
|
|
ESPP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
0.2
|
%
|
|
|
0.8
|
%
|
|
|
3.3
|
%
|
Volatility
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
|
43
|
%
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
Dividend yield
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected term (years)
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
Resulting average fair value
|
|
$
|
9.64
|
|
|
$
|
11.66
|
|
|
$
|
13.31
|
|
The risk-free interest rate assumption is based upon observed
interest rates appropriate for the terms of the Companys
employee stock options and shares purchasable under the ESPP.
The Company uses a blend of historical
F-22
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
and implied volatility for the expected volatility assumption.
The selection of a blend of historical and implied volatility
data to estimate expected volatility was based upon the
availability of actively traded options on the Companys
stock and the Companys assessment that a blend is more
representative of future stock price trends than either one
individually. The Company historically has not made dividend
payments, but is required to assume a dividend yield as an input
to the Black-Scholes-Merton model. The dividend yield is based
on the Companys expectation that no dividends will be paid
in the foreseeable future. The expected term of employee stock
options represents the weighted-average period the stock options
are expected to remain outstanding. The Company uses a midpoint
scenario method, which assumes that all vested, outstanding
options are settled halfway between the date of measurement and
their expiration date. The calculation also leverages the
history of actual exercises and post-vesting cancellations.
Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and revised, if
necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ
from those estimates. The Company assesses the forfeiture rate
on an annual basis and revises the rate when deemed necessary.
The Company assesses the probability of achievement of the
performance conditions under performance stock awards on a
quarterly basis.
The Companys unrecognized stock-based compensation
expense, before income taxes and adjusted for estimated
forfeitures, related to outstanding unvested share-based payment
awards was approximately as follows (in thousands, except number
of years):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
Unrecognized
|
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
Expense as of
|
|
|
|
Expense Life
|
|
December 31,
|
|
Awards
|
|
(Years)
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Options
|
|
2.4
|
|
$
|
23,913
|
|
Employee stock purchase plan
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
81
|
|
Performance stock awards
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
713
|
|
Restricted stock
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
4,111
|
|
Deferred issuance restricted stock
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
1,199
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
$
|
30,017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes the stock-based compensation
expense that the Company recorded in its consolidated statements
of income (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Cost of product sales
|
|
$
|
3,625
|
|
|
$
|
3,033
|
|
|
$
|
2,495
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
6,911
|
|
|
|
7,071
|
|
|
|
6,101
|
|
Marketing and sales
|
|
|
2,880
|
|
|
|
3,391
|
|
|
|
2,854
|
|
General and administrative
|
|
|
10,659
|
|
|
|
9,925
|
|
|
|
9,213
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
24,075
|
|
|
$
|
23,420
|
|
|
$
|
20,663
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-23
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
Note 6
|
Balance
sheet information
|
The following tables provide details of selected balance sheet
items (in thousands):
Inventories
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Raw materials and supplies
|
|
$
|
16,915
|
|
|
$
|
13,260
|
|
Work in process
|
|
|
21,446
|
|
|
|
23,656
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
28,055
|
|
|
|
24,155
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories, net
|
|
$
|
66,416
|
|
|
$
|
61,071
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property,
plant and equipment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Land
|
|
$
|
19,287
|
|
|
$
|
19,268
|
|
Building
|
|
|
80,010
|
|
|
|
80,130
|
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
195,927
|
|
|
|
175,885
|
|
Building improvements
|
|
|
48,217
|
|
|
|
42,718
|
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
|
21,999
|
|
|
|
17,705
|
|
Construction in-progress
|
|
|
1,855
|
|
|
|
457
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, at cost
|
|
|
367,295
|
|
|
|
336,163
|
|
Less: accumulated depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
(206,432
|
)
|
|
|
(178,726
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
160,863
|
|
|
$
|
157,437
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
accrued expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Royalties
|
|
$
|
3,315
|
|
|
$
|
2,907
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
3,385
|
|
|
|
4,930
|
|
Professional fees
|
|
|
1,182
|
|
|
|
1,175
|
|
Marketing
|
|
|
1,177
|
|
|
|
1,365
|
|
Interest
|
|
|
896
|
|
|
|
726
|
|
Warranty
|
|
|
373
|
|
|
|
334
|
|
Current component of contingent consideration
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,829
|
|
Other
|
|
|
3,607
|
|
|
|
4,489
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other accrued expenses
|
|
$
|
13,935
|
|
|
$
|
24,755
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 7
|
Marketable
securities
|
The Companys marketable securities include equity
securities, treasury securities, tax advantaged municipal
securities and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
(FDIC) insured corporate bonds with a minimum
Moodys
F-24
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
credit rating of A3 or a Standard & Poors credit
rating of A-. As of December 31, 2010, the Company did not
hold auction rate securities and has never held any such
securities. The Companys investment policy limits the
effective maturity on individual securities to six years and an
average portfolio maturity to three years. As of
December 31, 2010, the Companys portfolios had an
average maturity of two years and an average credit quality of
AA1 as defined by Moodys.
The following is a summary of marketable securities as of
December 31, 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities
|
|
$
|
380,242
|
|
|
$
|
561
|
|
|
$
|
(2,968
|
)
|
|
$
|
377,835
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
50,000
|
|
|
|
2,130
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,130
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
430,242
|
|
|
$
|
2,691
|
|
|
$
|
(2,968
|
)
|
|
$
|
429,965
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities
|
|
$
|
415,236
|
|
|
$
|
3,321
|
|
|
$
|
(95
|
)
|
|
$
|
418,462
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
415,236
|
|
|
$
|
3,321
|
|
|
$
|
(95
|
)
|
|
$
|
418,462
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table shows the estimated fair values and gross
unrealized losses for the Companys investments in
individual debt securities that have been in a continuous
unrealized loss position deemed to be temporary for less than
12 months and for more than 12 months (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 12 Months
|
|
|
More than 12 Months
|
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
230,043
|
|
|
$
|
(2,967
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,604
|
|
|
$
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2009
|
|
$
|
27,352
|
|
|
$
|
(93
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,604
|
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company had 110 and 23
marketable debt securities, respectively, in an unrealized loss
position. Of the 110 securities in an unrealized loss position
at December 31, 2010, the average estimated fair value and
average unrealized loss was $2.1 million and $27,000,
respectively. Of the 23 securities in an unrealized loss
position at December 31, 2009, the average estimated fair
value and average unrealized loss was $1.2 million and
$4,000, respectively. The increase in the number of debt
securities held in an unrealized loss position from 2009 to 2010
is due to the timing of purchases and sales of the
Companys debt securities in 2010, along with increases in
market interest rates.
The contractual terms of the debt securities held by the Company
do not permit the issuer to settle the securities at a price
less than the amortized cost of the investments. The Company
does not consider its investments in debt securities with a
current unrealized loss position to be
other-than-temporarily
impaired at December 31, 2010 because the Company does not
intend to sell the investments and it is not more likely than
not that the Company will be required to sell the investments
before recovery of their amortized cost.
F-25
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table shows the current and non-current
classification of the Companys marketable securities as of
December 31, 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Current
|
|
$
|
170,648
|
|
|
$
|
402,990
|
|
Non-current
|
|
|
259,317
|
|
|
|
15,472
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable securities
|
|
$
|
429,965
|
|
|
$
|
418,462
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The composition of the Companys marketable security
portfolio between current and non-current has changed
significantly during 2010 as compared to 2009. As of
December 31, 2010, the Company held non-current marketable
debt securities and marketable equity securities of
$207.2 million and $52.1 million, respectively. As of
December 31, 2009, all securities within current and
non-current were marketable debt securities. Investments in an
unrealized loss position deemed to be temporary at
December 31, 2010 and 2009 that have a contractual maturity
of greater than 12 months have been classified on the
Companys consolidated balance sheets as non-current
marketable securities under the caption Marketable
securities, net of current portion, reflecting the
Companys current intent and ability to hold such
investments to maturity. The Companys investments in
marketable debt securities and marketable equity securities are
classified as
available-for-sale.
The following table shows the gross realized gains and losses
from the sale of marketable securities, based on the specific
identification method, for the years ended December 31,
2010, 2009 and 2008 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of marketable securities
|
|
$
|
432,856
|
|
|
$
|
446,333
|
|
|
$
|
353,097
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross realized gains
|
|
$
|
6,728
|
|
|
$
|
10,985
|
|
|
$
|
1,142
|
|
Gross realized losses
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
(467
|
)
|
|
|
(133
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net realized gain
|
|
$
|
6,724
|
|
|
$
|
10,518
|
|
|
$
|
1,009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amortized cost and estimated fair value of
available-for-sale
marketable securities as of December 31, 2010, by
contractual maturity, are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
Fair
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Maturities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Within one year
|
|
$
|
87,164
|
|
|
$
|
158
|
|
|
$
|
(11
|
)
|
|
$
|
87,311
|
|
After one year through five years
|
|
|
256,778
|
|
|
|
403
|
|
|
|
(2,138
|
)
|
|
|
255,043
|
|
After five years through ten years
|
|
|
36,300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(819
|
)
|
|
|
35,481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable debt securities
|
|
$
|
380,242
|
|
|
$
|
561
|
|
|
$
|
(2,968
|
)
|
|
$
|
377,835
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable equity securities
|
|
$
|
50,000
|
|
|
$
|
2,130
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
52,130
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 8
|
Fair
value measurements
|
In January 2010, the Company adopted updated accounting guidance
which requires additional disclosure about the amounts of and
reasons for significant transfers into and out of Level 1
and Level 2 fair value measurements. This standard also
clarifies existing disclosure requirements related to the level
of
F-26
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
disaggregation of fair value measurements for each class of
assets and liabilities and disclosures about inputs and
valuation techniques used to measure fair value for both
recurring and non-recurring Level 2 and Level 3
measurements. Because this accounting standard only requires
enhanced disclosure, the adoption of this standard did not
impact the Companys financial position or results of
operations for the year ended December 31, 2010. In
addition, effective for interim and annual periods beginning
after December 15, 2010, this standard will require
additional disclosure and require an entity to present
disaggregated information about activity in Level 3 fair
value measurements on a gross basis, rather than as one net
amount.
Fair value is defined as the exit price, or the amount that
would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a
liability in an orderly transaction between market participants
as of the measurement date. There is an established hierarchy
for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use
of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable
inputs by requiring that the most observable inputs be used when
available. Observable inputs are inputs market participants
would use in valuing the asset or liability and are developed
based on market data obtained from sources independent of the
Company. Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect the
Companys assumptions about the factors market participants
would use in valuing the asset or liability. The guidance
establishes three levels of inputs that may be used to measure
fair value:
|
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Valuations derived from valuation
techniques in which one or more significant inputs or
significant value drivers are unobservable.
|
Assets and liabilities are classified based upon the lowest
level of input that is significant to the fair value
measurement. The Company reviews the fair value hierarchy on a
quarterly basis. Changes in the observations or valuation inputs
may result in a reclassification of levels for certain
securities within the fair value hierarchy.
Set forth below is a description of the Companys valuation
methodologies used for assets and liabilities measured at fair
value, as well as the general classification of such instruments
pursuant to the valuation hierarchy. Where appropriate, the
description includes details of the valuation models, the key
inputs to those models, as well as any significant assumptions.
Assets
and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring
Basis
The Companys marketable securities include equity
securities, treasury securities, tax advantaged municipal
securities, FDIC insured corporate bonds and money market funds.
When available, the Company uses quoted market prices to
determine fair value, and classifies such items as Level 1.
If quoted market prices are not available, prices are determined
using prices for recently traded financial instruments with
similar underlying terms as well as directly or indirectly
observable inputs, such as interest rates and yield curves that
are observable at commonly quoted intervals. The Company
classifies such items as Level 2.
In October 2010, Pacific Biosciences completed an initial public
offering of its common stock, which now trades on the NASDAQ
Global Select Market under the symbol PACB. As a
result of the initial public offering, the Companys
preferred stock was converted into common stock. During the
quarter ended December 31, 2010, the Company reclassified
its investment in Pacific Biosciences from a Level 3
investment to a Level 1 investment. The Companys
investment in Pacific Biosciences, which totaled
$52.1 million as of December 31, 2010, is included in
Marketable securities, net of current portion, on
the Companys consolidated balance sheets. The
Companys investment in Pacific Biosciences common
stock is subject to a customary
lock-up
period, which generally prohibits the Company from selling or
otherwise transferring such securities until on or about
April 23, 2011 (180 days after the date of the final
prospectus relating to Pacific Biosciences initial public
offering).
F-27
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The following table presents the Companys fair value
hierarchy for assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a
recurring basis (as described above) as of December 31,
2010 and 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Carrying
|
|
|
|
Active Markets for
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
Value in the
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets
|
|
|
Observable Inputs
|
|
|
Unobservable Inputs
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
|
Balance Sheet
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,211
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,211
|
|
Marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
52,130
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,130
|
|
Treasury securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,891
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,891
|
|
Municipal securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
366,300
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
366,300
|
|
Corporate obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,644
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,644
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable securities
|
|
|
52,130
|
|
|
|
377,835
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
429,965
|
|
Deferred compensation plan assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,298
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,298
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets at fair value
|
|
$
|
52,130
|
|
|
$
|
385,344
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
437,474
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation plan liabilities
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,246
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,246
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities at fair value
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,246
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,246
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Carrying
|
|
|
|
Active Markets for
|
|
|
Significant Other
|
|
|
Significant
|
|
|
Value in the
|
|
|
|
Identical Assets
|
|
|
Observable Inputs
|
|
|
Unobservable Inputs
|
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
|
(Level 1)
|
|
|
(Level 2)
|
|
|
(Level 3)
|
|
|
Balance Sheet
|
|
|
Assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
13,000
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
13,000
|
|
Marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,961
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,961
|
|
Municipal securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
324,252
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
324,252
|
|
Corporate obligations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92,249
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
92,249
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
418,462
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
418,462
|
|
Deferred compensation plan assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets at fair value
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
437,133
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
437,133
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contingent consideration
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
17,994
|
|
|
$
|
17,994
|
|
Deferred compensation plan liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities at fair value
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,700
|
|
|
$
|
17,994
|
|
|
$
|
23,694
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-28
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
For those financial instruments with significant Level 3
inputs, the following roll-forward summarizes the activity for
the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 contingent consideration as of December 31,
2008
|
|
$
|
|
|
Transfers into Level 3 from business combinations
|
|
|
17,994
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 contingent consideration as of December 31,
2009
|
|
|
17,994
|
|
Payment of milestone
|
|
|
(10,000
|
)
|
Gain included in other (income) expense
|
|
|
(7,994
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 contingent consideration as of December 31,
2010
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The range of potential contingent consideration that the Company
could pay related to the acquisition of Prodesse was originally
between $0 and $25.0 million. This range is tied to
multiple performance measures including commercial and
regulatory milestones. As a result of the failure to achieve a
specified milestone, the maximum amount of contingent
consideration the Company may be required to pay for its
acquisition of Prodesse has been reduced to $15.0 million.
The Company reassesses the fair value of this contingent
consideration liability on a quarterly basis. This assessment is
based on a calculation that considers the forecasted achievement
of the underlying milestones as of the date of determination, as
well as the timing of the related cash payments, and then
discounts these amounts based on a discount rate the Company
determines is appropriate for the underlying milestones.
Based on these calculations, the Company initially recorded
$18.0 million as of the date of acquisition as the fair
value of this potential contingent consideration liability. In
July 2010 the Company received FDA clearance of its ProFAST+
assay, thereby satisfying one of the acquisition-related
milestones and triggering a $10.0 million payment to former
Prodesse securityholders. The fair value of the remaining
contingent consideration was reduced to $0 for the year ended
December 31, 2010 because the Company does not currently
expect to make any further milestone payments related to its
acquisition of Prodesse. Future milestone payments, if any, will
occur by the second quarter of 2012.
Assets
and liabilities measured at fair value on a non-recurring
basis
Certain assets and liabilities, including cost method
investments, are measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis
and therefore are not included in the table above. Such
instruments are not measured at fair value on an ongoing basis
but are subject to fair value adjustments in certain
circumstances (for example, when there is evidence of
impairment).
Equity
investment in public companies
In April 2009, the Company made a $5.0 million preferred
stock investment in DiagnoCure, Inc. (DiagnoCure), a
publicly-held company traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange. The
Companys equity investment was initially valued based on
the transaction price under the cost method of accounting. The
market value of the underlying common stock is the most
observable value of the preferred stock, but because there is no
active market for DiagnoCures preferred shares the Company
has classified its equity investment in DiagnoCure as
Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. The Companys
investment in DiagnoCure, which totaled $5.0 million as of
December 31, 2010, is included in Licenses,
manufacturing access fees and other assets, net on the
Companys consolidated balance sheets.
Equity
investments in private companies
The valuation of investments in non-public companies requires
significant management judgment due to the absence of quoted
market prices, inherent lack of liquidity and the long-term
nature of such assets. The Companys
F-29
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
equity investments in private companies are initially valued
based upon the transaction price under the cost method of
accounting. Equity investments in non-public companies are
classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
In September 2009, the Company spun-off its industrial testing
assets to Roka, a newly formed private company. In consideration
for the contribution of assets, the Company received shares of
preferred stock representing 19.9% of Rokas capital stock
on a fully diluted basis. The Companys investment in Roka
totaled approximately $0.7 million as of December 31,
2010, and is included in Licenses, manufacturing access
fees and other assets, net on the Companys
consolidated balance sheets.
In 2006, the Company invested in Qualigen, Inc.
(Qualigen), a private company. The Companys
investment in Qualigen, which totaled approximately
$5.4 million as of December 31, 2010, is also included
in Licenses, manufacturing access fees and other assets,
net on the Companys consolidated balance sheets.
During the third quarter of 2008, the Company received financial
statements from Qualigen that indicated potential issues towards
the execution of their long-term sales plans. As a result, the
Company performed a valuation of Qualigen. The valuation of the
Companys investment was based upon several factors and
included both a market approach and an income (discounted cash
flow method) approach. The range of these two approaches
resulted in a potential value of the Companys investment
of between $4.2 and $6.6 million. The Company concluded
that an equal weighting of the market and income methods was
appropriate and as a result of this valuation the Companys
ownership interest in Qualigen was valued at approximately
$5.4 million. The Company believes that the decline in the
value of this investment from its initial cost basis was an
other-than-temporary
impairment of its investment and thus it recorded an impairment
charge of $1.6 million to write down the carrying value of
its equity interest. This amount is included in Other
income (expense) on the Companys consolidated
statements of income.
The Company records impairment charges when an investment has
experienced a decline that is deemed to be
other-than-temporary.
The determination that a decline is
other-than-temporary
is, in part, subjective and influenced by many factors. Future
adverse changes in market conditions or poor operating results
of investees could result in losses or an inability to recover
the carrying value of the investments, thereby possibly
requiring impairment charges in the future. When assessing
investments in private companies for an
other-than-temporary
decline in value, the Company considers many factors, including,
but not limited to, the following: the share price from the
investees latest financing round; the performance of the
investee in relation to its own operating targets and its
business plan; the investees revenue and cost trends; the
investees liquidity and cash position, including its cash
burn rate; and market acceptance of the investees products
and services. From time to time, the Company may consider third
party evaluations or valuation reports. The Company also
considers new products
and/or
services that the investee may have forthcoming, any significant
news specific to the investee, the investees competitors
and/or
industry and the outlook of the overall industry in which the
investee operates. In the event the Companys judgments
change as to other-than temporary declines in value, the Company
may record an impairment loss, which could have an adverse
effect on its results of operations.
F-30
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
|
|
Note 9
|
Intangible
and other assets by asset class and related accumulated
amortization
|
Intangible assets are recorded at cost, less accumulated
amortization. Amortization of intangible assets is provided over
their estimated useful lives ranging from 2 to 20 years on
a straight-line basis. The Companys intangible and other
assets and related accumulated amortization consisted of the
following (in thousands, except number of years):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
Avg.
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Remaining Life
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Years)
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
|
Amortization
|
|
|
Net
|
|
|
Intangible and other assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capitalized software
|
|
4
|
|
$
|
30,931
|
|
|
$
|
(16,950
|
)
|
|
$
|
13,981
|
|
|
$
|
26,873
|
|
|
$
|
(14,313
|
)
|
|
$
|
12,560
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
N/A
|
|
$
|
157,985
|
|
|
$
|
(7,677
|
)
|
|
$
|
150,308
|
|
|
$
|
130,357
|
|
|
$
|
(7,677
|
)
|
|
$
|
122,680
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased intangible assets
|
|
12
|
|
$
|
166,541
|
|
|
$
|
(46,271
|
)
|
|
$
|
120,270
|
|
|
$
|
145,502
|
|
|
$
|
(37,487
|
)
|
|
$
|
108,015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
License, manufacturing access fees and other assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
License and manufacturing access
fees(1)
|
|
7
|
|
|
64,259
|
|
|
|
(23,995
|
)
|
|
|
40,264
|
|
|
|
62,502
|
|
|
|
(18,326
|
)
|
|
|
44,176
|
|
Patents
|
|
8
|
|
|
30,520
|
|
|
|
(18,070
|
)
|
|
|
12,450
|
|
|
|
19,042
|
|
|
|
(17,486
|
)
|
|
|
1,556
|
|
Investment in Qualigen, Inc.
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
5,404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,404
|
|
|
|
5,404
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,404
|
|
Investment in DiagnoCure, Inc.
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,000
|
|
Investment in Roka Bioscience, Inc.
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
725
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
725
|
|
|
|
725
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
725
|
|
Other assets
|
|
N/A
|
|
|
8,782
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,782
|
|
|
|
7,961
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,961
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
114,690
|
|
|
$
|
(42,065
|
)
|
|
$
|
72,625
|
|
|
$
|
100,634
|
|
|
$
|
(35,812
|
)
|
|
$
|
64,822
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
In 2008, the Company recorded an impairment charge for the net
capitalized balance of $3.5 million under its license
agreement with Corixa. See complete discussion below. |
In January 2008, Caris Diagnostics completed the acquisition of
Molecular Profiling Institute, Inc. (MPI). Pursuant
to this sale transaction, the Companys equity interest in
MPI was converted into approximately $4.4 million of cash
proceeds, of which $4.1 million was received in January
2008 and the remaining $0.3 million was received in March
2010. The Company recorded a $1.6 million gain associated
with the initial $4.1 million received in January 2008, and
recorded the remaining gain of $0.3 million in March 2010.
In May 2008, pursuant to the Companys supply and purchase
agreement with F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd. and its affiliate
Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. (together referred to as
Roche), upon the first commercial sale of its
CE-marked APTIMA HPV assay in Europe, the Company paid Roche
$10.0 million in manufacturing access fees. Prior to and
including May 2008, the Companys original payment to Roche
of $20.0 million was being amortized to R&D expense.
Beginning in June 2008, the additional payment of
$10.0 million and any unamortized amounts remaining from
the original payment are being amortized to cost of product
sales.
In June 2008, the Company recorded an impairment charge for the
net capitalized balance of $3.5 million under its license
agreement with Corixa. This charge is included in R&D
expense on the consolidated statements of income. In the second
quarter of 2008, a series of events indicated that future
alternative uses of the capitalized intangible asset were
unlikely and that recoverability of the asset through future
cash flows was not considered likely enough to support continued
capitalization. These second quarter 2008 indicators of
impairment included
F-31
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
decisions on the Companys planned commercial approach for
oncology diagnostic products, the completion of a detailed
review of the intellectual property suite acquired from Corixa,
including the Companys assessment of the proven clinical
utility for a majority of the related markers, and the potential
for near term sublicense income that could be generated from the
intellectual property acquired.
As of December 31, 2010, the Company had capitalized
$13.4 million, net, in software costs associated with
development of the TIGRIS and PANTHER instruments.
The Company had aggregate amortization expense of
$17.7 million, $12.8 million and $8.2 million for
the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008,
respectively, including $2.6 million relating to
capitalized software in each of those years.
The expected future annual amortization expense of the
Companys intangible assets is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
$
|
20,259
|
|
2012
|
|
|
20,064
|
|
2013
|
|
|
19,839
|
|
2014
|
|
|
17,875
|
|
2015
|
|
|
16,487
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
80,238
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total(1)
|
|
$
|
174,763
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excludes $11.9 million and $0.3 million of in-process
research and development assets and capitalized software assets,
respectively, which had not commenced amortization as of
December 31, 2010. These products will commence
amortization in the future when the commercial availability of
the underlying products can be reliably estimated. |
In February 2009, the Company entered into a credit agreement
with Bank of America, which provided for a one-year senior
secured revolving credit facility in an amount of up to
$180.0 million that is subject to a borrowing base formula.
The revolving credit facility has a
sub-limit
for the issuance of letters of credit in a face amount of up to
$10.0 million. Advances under the revolving credit facility
were used to consummate the Companys acquisition of Tepnel
and are also available for other general corporate purposes. At
the Companys option, loans accrue interest at a per annum
rate based on, either: the base rate (the base rate is defined
as the greatest of (i) the federal funds rate plus a margin
equal to 0.50%, (ii) Bank of Americas prime rate and
(iii) the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR)
plus a margin equal to 1.00%); or LIBOR plus a margin equal to
0.60%, in each case for interest periods of 1, 2, 3 or
6 months as selected by the Company. In connection with the
credit agreement, the Company also entered into a security
agreement, pursuant to which the Company secured its obligations
under the credit agreement with a first priority security
interest in the securities, cash and other investment property
held in specified accounts maintained by Merrill Lynch, Pierce,
Fenner & Smith Incorporated, an affiliate of Bank of
America. In connection with the execution of the credit
agreement with Bank of America, the Company terminated the
commitments under its unsecured bank line of credit with Wells
Fargo Bank, N.A., effective as of February 27, 2009. There
were no amounts outstanding under the Wells Fargo Bank line of
credit as of the termination date.
In March 2009, the Company borrowed $170.0 million under
the revolving credit facility in anticipation of funding its
acquisition of Tepnel. Also in March 2009, the Company and Bank
of America amended the credit agreement to increase the amount
that the Company can borrow from time to time under the credit
agreement from
F-32
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
$180.0 million to $250.0 million. In April 2009, the
Company borrowed an additional $70.0 million under its
revolving credit facility with Bank of America.
In February 2010, the Company entered into a second amendment to
its credit agreement with Bank of America, pursuant to which,
among other things, the maturity date of the Companys
senior secured revolving credit facility was extended for an
additional one-year period. In February 2011, the Company
entered into a third amendment to its credit agreement with Bank
of America, pursuant to which the maturity date of the
Companys senior secured revolving credit facility was
extended for an additional one-year period. As extended, the
credit facility now expires on February 24, 2012. As of
December 31, 2010, the total principal amount outstanding
under the revolving credit facility was $240.0 million and
the interest rate payable on such outstanding amount was
approximately 0.86%. In February 2011, the Company borrowed the
remaining $10.0 million under the revolving credit
facility, bringing the total principal amount outstanding under
the credit facility to $250.0 million.
As a result of the Tepnel acquisition, the Company assumed
Tepnels pre-existing fixed-rate term loan of
£0.5 million which accrued interest at an effective
rate of 6.6%. The Company repaid this term loan in full in the
fourth quarter of 2010.
The components of earnings before income tax were (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
159,629
|
|
|
$
|
141,893
|
|
|
$
|
160,509
|
|
Rest of World
|
|
|
(4,418
|
)
|
|
|
(2,091
|
)
|
|
|
354
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
155,211
|
|
|
$
|
139,802
|
|
|
$
|
160,863
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The provision for income tax consists of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
47,272
|
|
|
$
|
44,760
|
|
|
$
|
48,758
|
|
State
|
|
|
5,934
|
|
|
|
8,370
|
|
|
|
9,941
|
|
Rest of World
|
|
|
(533
|
)
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,673
|
|
|
|
53,075
|
|
|
|
58,693
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
|
(4,812
|
)
|
|
|
(4,390
|
)
|
|
|
(4,831
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
463
|
|
|
|
(406
|
)
|
|
|
(32
|
)
|
Rest of World
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
(260
|
)
|
|
|
79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,399
|
)
|
|
|
(5,056
|
)
|
|
|
(4,784
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total income tax
|
|
$
|
48,274
|
|
|
$
|
48,019
|
|
|
$
|
53,909
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-33
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Significant components of the Companys deferred tax assets
and liabilities for federal and state income taxes are as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research tax credit carryforwards
|
|
$
|
624
|
|
|
$
|
2,475
|
|
License, manufacturing access fees and other intangibles
|
|
|
1,192
|
|
|
|
1,395
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
3,618
|
|
|
|
3,515
|
|
Deferred revenue
|
|
|
1,114
|
|
|
|
1,208
|
|
Deferred compensation
|
|
|
2,384
|
|
|
|
2,276
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
23,472
|
|
|
|
21,522
|
|
Accrued vacation
|
|
|
2,194
|
|
|
|
2,626
|
|
Other
|
|
|
968
|
|
|
|
2,104
|
|
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
9,968
|
|
|
|
10,286
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets
|
|
|
45,534
|
|
|
|
47,407
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(7,837
|
)
|
|
|
(6,392
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
37,697
|
|
|
$
|
41,015
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased intangibles
|
|
$
|
(45,693
|
)
|
|
$
|
(39,203
|
)
|
Capitalized costs expensed for tax
|
|
|
(6,048
|
)
|
|
|
(5,721
|
)
|
Property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(2,680
|
)
|
|
|
(4,223
|
)
|
Unrealized gains on marketable securities
|
|
|
845
|
|
|
|
(1,129
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(53,576
|
)
|
|
|
(50,276
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax liability
|
|
$
|
(15,879
|
)
|
|
$
|
(9,261
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some of the Companys foreign subsidiaries have
historically generated tax losses resulting in accumulated
totals of approximately $38.0 million as of
December 31, 2010. Most of these tax losses are in the UK
and were assumed as part of the Companys acquisition of
Tepnel in 2009. The remaining loss carryforwards are in France
and Germany. These losses do not expire, but the Company has
established a valuation allowance against the deferred tax
assets arising from these losses until such time as the Company
can reasonably estimate there will be sufficient future profits
in the respective countries to utilize some or all of the
accumulated losses.
The Company has not provided for U.S. income and foreign
withholding taxes on less than $2.2 million of
undistributed earnings from
non-U.S. subsidiaries
as these earnings are indefinitely invested outside the
U.S. Upon distribution of those earnings in the form of
dividends or otherwise, the Company would be subject to both
U.S. income taxes and withholding taxes payable to the
foreign countries, but would also be able to offset unrecognized
foreign tax credit carryforwards. It is not practicable for the
Company to determine the total amount of unrecognized deferred
U.S. income tax liability because of the complexities
associated with its hypothetical calculation.
F-34
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The provision for income tax reconciles to the amount computed
by applying the federal statutory rate to income before tax as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Expected income tax provision at federal statutory rate
|
|
$
|
54,324
|
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
$
|
48,931
|
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
|
$
|
56,302
|
|
|
|
35
|
%
|
State income tax provision, net of federal benefit
|
|
|
6,490
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
|
6,092
|
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
|
7,275
|
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
Tax advantaged interest income
|
|
|
(1,497)
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
%
|
|
|
(3,394)
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
%
|
|
|
(5,210)
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
%
|
Domestic manufacturing tax benefits
|
|
|
(5,005)
|
|
|
|
(3)
|
%
|
|
|
(2,795)
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
%
|
|
|
(2,920)
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
%
|
Research tax credits
|
|
|
(2,883)
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
%
|
|
|
(3,100)
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
%
|
|
|
(1,591)
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
%
|
Settlements with tax authorities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
(979)
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
%
|
Other, net
|
|
|
(3,155)
|
|
|
|
(2)
|
%
|
|
|
2,285
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
1,032
|
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual income tax provision
|
|
$
|
48,274
|
|
|
|
31
|
%
|
|
$
|
48,019
|
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
|
$
|
53,909
|
|
|
|
34
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following is a reconciliation of the cumulative unrecognized
tax benefits (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2008
(including the cumulative effect increase)
|
|
$
|
5,753
|
|
Increase in unrecognized tax benefits for years prior to 2009
|
|
|
294
|
|
Increase in unrecognized tax benefits for 2009
|
|
|
992
|
|
Decrease in unrecognized tax benefits for lapse of statute of
limitations
|
|
|
(58
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2009
|
|
|
6,981
|
|
Increase in unrecognized tax benefits for years prior to 2010
|
|
|
956
|
|
Increase in tax position relating to acquisition
|
|
|
778
|
|
Increase in unrecognized tax benefits for 2010
|
|
|
1,858
|
|
Decrease in unrecognized tax benefits for lapse of statute of
limitations
|
|
|
(951
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2010
|
|
$
|
9,622
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All of the unrecognized tax benefits, if recognized, would
affect the Companys effective tax rate. The Company does
not anticipate there will be a significant change in the
unrecognized tax benefits within the next 12 months. As of
December 31, 2010 and 2009, the Company had
$1.0 million and $0.5 million, respectively, in
accrued interest related to unrecognized tax benefits. It is the
Companys practice to include interest and penalties that
relate to income tax matters as a component of income tax
expense.
The Companys federal tax returns for the 2007 through 2009
tax years, California tax returns for the 2005 through 2009 tax
years, and UK tax returns for the 2004 through 2009 tax years
are subject to future examination.
The Company reduced stockholders equity by
$1.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2010,
which was related to employee stock-based compensation. Tax
benefits related to employee stock-based compensation increased
stockholders equity of the Company by $2.0 million
and $2.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2009
and 2008, respectively.
|
|
Note 12
|
Stockholders
equity
|
Stock
options, performance stock and restricted stock
awards
The Companys stock option program is a broad-based,
long-term retention program that is intended to attract and
retain talented employees and to align stockholder and employee
interests. The majority of the Companys full-time
employees have historically participated in the Companys
stock option program.
F-35
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
In May 2003, the Company adopted, and the Companys
stockholders subsequently approved, The 2003 Incentive Award
Plan (the 2003 Plan). The 2003 Plan provides for
equity incentives for officers, directors, employees and
consultants through the granting of incentive and non-statutory
stock options, restricted stock, performance stock, stock
appreciation rights and certain other equity awards. The
exercise price of each stock option granted under the 2003 Plan
must be equal to or greater than the fair market value of the
Companys common stock on the date of grant. Stock options
granted under the 2003 Plan are generally subject to vesting at
the rate of 25% one year from the grant date and
1/48
each month thereafter until the options are fully vested. Annual
grants to non-employee directors of the Company vest over one
year at the rate of
1/12
of the shares vesting monthly.
In May 2006, the Companys stockholders approved an
amendment and restatement of the 2003 Plan that increased the
aggregate number of shares of common stock authorized for
issuance under the 2003 Plan by 3,000,000 shares, from
5,000,000 shares to 8,000,000 shares. Pursuant to the
amended 2003 Plan, the Board of Directors or Compensation
Committee, as applicable, may continue to determine the terms
and vesting of all options and other awards granted under the
2003 Plan; however, in no event may the award term exceed seven
years (in lieu of ten years under the 2003 Plan prior to its
amendment). Further, the number of shares of common stock
available for issuance under the amended 2003 Plan are reduced
by two shares for each share of common stock issued pursuant to
any award granted under the 2003 Plan after May 17, 2006,
other than an award of stock appreciation rights or options (in
lieu of a reduction of one share under the 2003 Plan prior to
its amendment). In May 2009, the Companys stockholders
approved a further amendment and restatement of the 2003 Plan
that increased the aggregate number of shares of common stock
authorized for issuance under the 2003 Plan by
2,500,000 shares, from 8,000,000 shares to
10,500,000 shares.
In November 2002, the Company adopted The 2002 New Hire Stock
Option Plan (the 2002 Plan) that authorized the
issuance of up to 400,000 shares of common stock for grants
under the 2002 Plan. The 2002 Plan provides for the grant of
non-statutory stock options only, with exercise price, option
term and vesting terms generally the same as those under the
2000 Plan described below. Options may only be granted under the
2002 Plan to newly hired employees of the Company.
In August 2000, the Company adopted, and the Companys sole
stockholder subsequently approved, The 2000 Equity Participation
Plan (the 2000 Plan) that authorized the issuance of
up to 4,827,946 shares of common stock for grants under the
2000 Plan. The 2000 Plan provides for the grant of incentive and
non-statutory stock options to employees, directors and
consultants of the Company. The exercise price of each option
granted under the 2000 Plan must be equal to or greater than the
fair market value of the Companys stock on the date of
grant. Generally, options vest 25% one year from the grant date
and
1/12
each month thereafter until the options are fully vested. The
term of the 2000 plan expired in August 2010, and options may no
longer be granted under the 2000 Plan.
A summary of the Companys stock option activity for all
option plans is as follows (in thousands, except per share data
and number of years):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Contractual
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Life (Years)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
5,890
|
|
|
$
|
44.96
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
1,110
|
|
|
|
43.53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
(904
|
)
|
|
|
30.35
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled
|
|
|
(396
|
)
|
|
|
51.32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
5,700
|
|
|
$
|
46.56
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
|
$
|
70,884
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
3,810
|
|
|
$
|
46.68
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
$
|
47,212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F-36
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company defines
in-the-money
options at December 31, 2010 as options that had exercise
prices that were lower than the $58.35 closing market price of
its common stock at that date. The aggregate intrinsic value of
options outstanding at December 31, 2010 is calculated as
the difference between the exercise price of the underlying
options and the market price of the Companys common stock
for the approximately 4,353,000 shares that were
in-the-money
at that date. The total intrinsic value of options exercised
during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 was
$15.2 million, $8.7 million, and $12.3 million,
respectively, determined as of the exercise dates.
Additional information about stock options outstanding at
December 31, 2010 with exercise prices less than or above
$58.35 per share, the closing price of the Companys common
stock as of December 31, 2010, is as follows (in thousands,
except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
Unexercisable
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
of
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
In-the-money
|
|
|
2,850
|
|
|
$
|
41.78
|
|
|
|
1,504
|
|
|
$
|
42.61
|
|
|
|
4,354
|
|
|
$
|
42.07
|
|
Out-of-the-money
|
|
|
960
|
|
|
|
61.22
|
|
|
|
386
|
|
|
|
60.73
|
|
|
|
1,346
|
|
|
|
61.08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total options outstanding
|
|
|
3,810
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,890
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted-average grant-date fair value per share of options
granted during the periods were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Exercise price equal to the fair value of common stock on the
grant date:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average exercise price
|
|
$
|
43.53
|
|
|
$
|
40.02
|
|
|
$
|
58.30
|
|
Weighted-average option fair value
|
|
$
|
12.85
|
|
|
$
|
12.64
|
|
|
$
|
18.36
|
|
Shares of common stock available for future grants under all
stock option plans were 1,426,000 at December 31, 2010.
A summary of the Companys restricted stock and deferred
issuance restricted stock award activity is as follows (in
thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Unvested at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
229
|
|
|
$
|
54.76
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
47.38
|
|
Vested and exercised
|
|
|
(101
|
)
|
|
|
54.55
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(13
|
)
|
|
|
56.17
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
$
|
54.41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fair value of the 101,403, 107,407 and 82,019 shares of
restricted stock and deferred issuance restricted stock that
vested during the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and
2008, respectively, was approximately $5.5 million,
$5.8 million and $4.3 million, respectively.
F-37
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
A summary of the Companys performance stock award activity
is as follows (in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Eligible to
|
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Receive
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Unvested at December 31, 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Awarded
|
|
|
70
|
|
|
|
104
|
|
|
|
42.66
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
42.66
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested at December 31, 2010
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
97
|
|
|
$
|
42.66
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In February 2010, the Company transitioned from its historical
practice of granting certain senior Company employees restricted
stock awards with time-based vesting provisions only, to
granting these employees the right to receive a designated
number of shares of common stock (the Performance Stock
Awards) based on the achievement of specific performance
levels related to the Companys 2010 revenues, earnings per
share and return on invested capital (collectively, the
Performance Stock Award Criteria). The Performance
Stock Awards were granted under the 2003 Plan and are intended
to qualify as performance-based compensation under
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended.
Pursuant to the terms of the applicable Performance Stock Award
agreement, each recipient may receive between zero and up to
150% of the target number of shares of Company stock originally
granted based on actual performance as measured against the
Performance Stock Award Criteria. If the Company fails to
achieve an identified threshold level of performance for any of
the Performance Stock Award Criteria, no Company stock will be
awarded for that Performance Stock Award Criteria. Shares of
Company stock will be issued pursuant to the terms of the
applicable Performance Stock Award agreements, and will vest
one-third on the date of issuance, one- third on the first
anniversary of the date of issuance and one-third on the second
anniversary of the date of issuance, as long as the award
recipient is employed by the Company on each such date.
In February 2011, the Compensation Committee approved the
issuance of approximately 37,500 shares of Company common
stock to award recipients as measured against the Performance
Stock Award Criteria.
Employee
Stock Purchase Plan
In May 2003, the Company adopted, and the Companys
stockholders subsequently approved, the ESPP that authorized the
issuance of up to 1,000,000 shares of the Companys
common stock. The ESPP is intended to qualify under
Section 423 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as
amended, and is for the benefit of qualifying employees as
designated by the Board of Directors. Under the terms of the
ESPP, purchases are made semiannually. Participating employees
may elect to have a maximum of 15% of their compensation, up to
a maximum of $10,625 per six month period, withheld through
payroll deductions to purchase shares of common stock under the
ESPP. The purchase price of the common stock purchased under the
ESPP is equal to 85% of the fair market value of the common
stock on the offering or Grant Date or the exercise
or purchase date, whichever is lower. During the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, employees purchased
117,027, 112,224 and 97,618 shares at an average price of
$37.53, $36.49 and $37.91 per share, respectively. As of
December 31, 2010, a total of 253,727 shares were
available for future issuance under the ESPP.
Stock
Repurchase Programs
In February 2010, the Companys Board of Directors
authorized the repurchase of up to $100.0 million of the
Companys common stock until December 31, 2010,
through negotiated or open market transactions. There was no
minimum or maximum number of shares to be repurchased under the
program. The Company completed the
F-38
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
program in December 2010, repurchasing and retiring
approximately 2,165,000 shares since the programs
inception at an average price of $46.16, or approximately
$99.9 million in total.
In August 2008, the Companys Board of Directors authorized
the repurchase of up to $250.0 million of the
Companys common stock over the two year period following
adoption of the program, through negotiated or open market
transactions. There was no minimum or maximum number of shares
to be repurchased under the program. The Company completed the
program in August 2009, repurchasing and retiring approximately
5,989,000 shares since the programs inception at an
average price of $41.72, or approximately $249.8 million in
total.
|
|
Note 13
|
Derivative
financial instruments
|
In 2009, the Company began entering into foreign currency
forward contracts to reduce its exposure to foreign currency
fluctuations of certain assets and liabilities denominated in
foreign currencies. These forward contracts had a maturity of
approximately 30 days and were not designated as hedges.
Accordingly, these instruments were marked to market at each
balance sheet date with changes in fair value recognized in
earnings under the caption Other income (expense).
The Company recorded a $0.9 million loss related to these
derivative instruments in 2009. The Company did not enter into
any foreign currency forward contracts during 2010.
|
|
Note 14
|
Commitments
and contingencies
|
Lease
commitments
The Company leases certain facilities under operating leases
that expire at various dates through August 2035. Facility
leases generally provide for periodic rent increases, and may
contain escalation clauses, rent abatement periods, and renewal
options.
As discussed in Note 3, the Company is consolidating its UK
locations. As a result, in August 2010, the Company leased
additional space at its Manchester, UK site which is being used
for manufacturing and laboratory purposes. The new term of the
lease runs through August 2035, and provides for an initial
18-month
rent abatement period. The Company has the option to terminate
the lease after the 15th and 20th year of the lease.
Future minimum payments under operating leases as of
December 31, 2010 are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
$
|
2,418
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2,841
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2,501
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2,183
|
|
2015
|
|
|
1,430
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
16,206
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
27,579
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rent expense was $2.0 million, $1.3 million and
$0.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2010,
2009 and 2008, respectively.
Purchase
and royalty commitments
The Company has purchase agreements that expire on various dates
through 2016, under which it is obligated to purchase
instruments and raw materials used in manufacturing from key
vendors. In connection with its R&D efforts, the Company
has various license agreements with unrelated parties that
provide the Company with rights to develop and market products
using certain technology and patent rights maintained by the
third parties. Terms of the various license agreements require
the Company to pay royalties ranging from 1% up to 35% of future
sales on
F-39
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
products using the specified technology. Such agreements
generally provide for a term that commences upon execution and
continues until expiration of the last patent covering the
licensed technology. Under various license agreements the
Company may be required to pay minimum annual royalty payments.
During 2010, 2009 and 2008, the Company recorded
$9.8 million, $9.2 million, and $5.2 million,
respectively, in royalty costs related to its various license
agreements under the caption Cost of product sales.
Future minimum payments under purchase and royalty commitments
as of December 31, 2010 are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ending December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
$
|
38,952
|
|
2012
|
|
|
4,619
|
|
2013
|
|
|
4,402
|
|
2014
|
|
|
4,809
|
|
2015
|
|
|
5,223
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
6,923
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
64,928
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contingent
Consideration
In connection with the acquisition of Prodesse, the Company was
originally obligated to make certain contingent payments to
Prodesse securityholders between $0 and $25.0 million. This
range is tied to multiple performance measures including
commercial and regulatory milestones. As a result of the failure
to achieve a specified milestone, the maximum amount of
contingent consideration the Company may be required to pay for
its acquisition of Prodesse has been reduced to
$15.0 million.
The Company initially recorded $18.0 million as of the date
of acquisition as the fair value of this potential contingent
consideration liability. In July 2010 the Company received FDA
clearance of its ProFAST+ assay, thereby satisfying one of the
acquisition-related milestones and triggering a
$10.0 million payment to former Prodesse securityholders.
The fair value of the remaining contingent consideration was
reduced to $0 for the year ended December 31, 2010 because
the Company does not currently expect to make any further
milestone payments related to its acquisition of Prodesse.
Future milestone payments, if any, will occur by the second
quarter of 2012.
Litigation
The Company is a party to the following litigation and may also
be involved in other litigation arising in the ordinary course
of business from time to time. The Company intends to vigorously
defend its interests in these matters. The Company expects that
the resolution of these matters will not have a material adverse
effect on its business, financial condition or results of
operations. However, due to the uncertainties inherent in
litigation, no assurance can be given as to the outcome of these
proceedings.
Digene
Corporation
In December 2006, Digene Corporation (Digene) filed
a demand for binding arbitration against Roche with the
International Center for Dispute Resolution (ICDR)
of the American Arbitration Association that asserted, among
other things, that Roche materially breached a cross-license
agreement between Roche and Digene by granting the Company an
improper sublicense and sought a determination that a supply and
purchase agreement between Roche and the Company was null and
void. Under the supply and purchase agreement, Roche
manufactures and supplies the Company with oligonucleotides for
HPV, which it uses in its molecular diagnostic assays. In July
2007, the ICDR arbitrators granted the Companys petition
to join the arbitration. In
F-40
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
April 2009, following the arbitration hearing, a three-member
arbitration panel from the ICDR issued an interim award
rejecting all claims asserted by Digene (now Qiagen
Gaithersburg, Inc.). In August 2009, the arbitrators issued
their final arbitration award, which confirmed the interim award
and also granted the Companys motion to recover
attorneys fees and costs from Digene in the amount of
approximately $2.9 million. The Company filed a petition to
confirm the arbitration award in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of New York and Digene filed a
petition to vacate or modify the award. In August 2010, the
court confirmed the arbitration award and the Company received
the $2.9 million from Digene, which was recorded as an
offset to general and administrative expense.
Becton,
Dickinson and Company
In October 2009, the Company filed a patent infringement action
against Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD) in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
California. The complaint alleges that BDs
Vipertm
XTRtm
testing system infringes five of the Companys
U.S. patents covering automated processes for preparing,
amplifying and detecting nucleic acid targets. The complaint
also alleges that BDs
ProbeTectm
Female Endocervical and Male Urethral Specimen Collection Kits
for Amplified Chlamydia trachomatis/Neisseria gonorrhoeae
(CT/GC) DNA assays used with the Viper XTR testing system
infringe two of the Companys U.S. patents covering
penetrable caps for specimen collection tubes. Finally, the
complaint alleges that BD has infringed the Companys
U.S. patent on methods and kits for destroying the ability
of a nucleic acid to be amplified; however, the Company has
moved to dismiss this specific claim from the lawsuit, while
maintaining all other claims. The complaint seeks monetary
damages and injunctive relief. In March 2010, the Company filed
a second complaint for patent infringement against BD in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
alleging that BDs BD MAX
Systemtm
(formerly known as the HandyLab Jaguar system) infringes four of
its U.S. patents covering automated processes for
preparing, amplifying and detecting nucleic acid targets. The
second complaint also seeks monetary damages and injunctive
relief. In June 2010, these two actions were consolidated into a
single legal proceeding. There can be no assurances as to the
final outcome of this litigation.
|
|
Note 15
|
Collaborative
and license agreements
|
Novartis
In July 2009, the Company entered into an amended and restated
collaboration agreement with Novartis, which sets forth the
current terms of the parties blood screening
collaboration. The term of the collaboration agreement runs
through June 30, 2025, unless terminated earlier pursuant
to its terms under certain specified conditions. Under the
collaboration agreement, the Company manufactures blood
screening products, while Novartis is responsible for marketing,
sales and service of those products, which Novartis sells under
its trademarks.
Starting in 2009, the Company was entitled to recover 50% of its
manufacturing costs incurred in connection with the
collaboration and will receive a percentage of the blood
screening assay revenue generated under the collaboration. The
Companys share of revenue from any assay that includes a
test for HCV is as follows: 2009, 44%;
2010-2011,
46%;
2012-2013,
47%; 2014, 48%; and 2015 through the remainder of the term of
the collaboration, 50%. The Companys share of blood
screening assay revenue from any assay that does not test for
HCV remains at 50%. Novartis has also reduced the amount of time
between product sales and payment of the Companys share of
blood screening assay revenue from 45 days to 30 days.
Novartis is obligated to purchase all of the quantities of these
assays specified on a
90-day
demand forecast, due 90 days prior to the date Novartis
intends to take delivery, and certain quantities specified on a
rolling
12-month
forecast.
Novartis has also agreed to provide certain funding to customize
the Companys PANTHER instrument for use in the blood
screening market and to pay the Company a milestone payment upon
the earlier of certain regulatory approvals or the first
commercial sale of the PANTHER instrument for use in the blood
screening field. The parties will share equally in any profit
attributable to Novartis sale or lease of PANTHER
instruments under the collaboration.
F-41
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
During the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008,
the Company recognized revenues under this collaboration
agreement in the following categories (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
203,140
|
|
|
$
|
197,536
|
|
|
$
|
206,283
|
|
Collaborative research revenue
|
|
|
13,921
|
|
|
|
6,711
|
|
|
|
14,711
|
|
Royalty and license revenue
|
|
|
2,396
|
|
|
|
4,203
|
|
|
|
3,930
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue from Novartis
|
|
$
|
219,457
|
|
|
$
|
208,450
|
|
|
$
|
224,924
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Company also has $2.3 million in deferred license
revenues under this collaboration agreement as of
December 31, 2010.
Pacific
Biosciences
In June 2010, the Company entered into a collaboration agreement
with Pacific Biosciences regarding the research and development
of instruments integrating the Companys sample preparation
technologies and Pacific Biosciences single-molecule DNA
sequencing technologies for use in clinical diagnostics. Subject
to customary termination rights, the initial term of the
collaboration will end on the earlier of December 15, 2012
or six months after Pacific Biosciences demonstrates the proof
of concept of its V2 single-molecule DNA sequencing
system. Each company is responsible for its own costs under the
collaboration. The Company incurred $0.4 million of
expenses for the year ended December 31, 2010 in connection
with this collaboration agreement.
|
|
Note 16
|
Significant
customers, product line and geographic information
|
The Company currently operates in one business segment, the
development, manufacturing, marketing, sales and support of
molecular diagnostic products primarily to diagnose human
diseases and screen donated human blood.
Product sales by product line were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Clinical diagnostics
|
|
$
|
305,816
|
|
|
|
59
|
%
|
|
$
|
274,215
|
|
|
|
57
|
%
|
|
$
|
222,937
|
|
|
|
52
|
%
|
Blood screening
|
|
|
203,140
|
|
|
|
39
|
%
|
|
|
197,537
|
|
|
|
41
|
%
|
|
|
206,283
|
|
|
|
48
|
%
|
Research products and services
|
|
|
13,753
|
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
|
12,007
|
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N/M
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total product sales
|
|
$
|
522,709
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
483,759
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
$
|
429,220
|
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008,
40%, 42%, and 48%, respectively, of total revenues were from
Novartis. No other customer accounted for more than 10% of the
Companys revenues in 2010, 2009, or 2008. The portions of
trade accounts receivable related to Novartis were 18% and 25%
at December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
F-42
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
Total revenues and net long-lived assets by geographic region
were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
Total revenue:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$
|
395,824
|
|
|
$
|
369,790
|
|
|
$
|
363,225
|
|
Rest of World
|
|
|
147,503
|
|
|
|
128,512
|
|
|
|
109,470
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
543,327
|
|
|
$
|
498,302
|
|
|
$
|
472,695
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Net long-lived
assets(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$
|
138,806
|
|
|
$
|
139,051
|
|
Rest of World
|
|
|
22,057
|
|
|
|
18,386
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
160,863
|
|
|
$
|
157,437
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Net long-lived assets related to the Companys property,
plant and equipment. |
|
|
Note 17
|
Employee
benefit plan
|
Effective May 1, 1990, the Company established a 401(k)
plan covering substantially all of the Companys employees
beginning the month after they are hired. Employees may
contribute up to 70% of their compensation per year (subject to
a maximum limit imposed by federal tax law). The Company is
obligated to make matching contributions equal to a maximum of
50% of the first 6% of compensation contributed by the employee.
The contributions charged to operations related to the
Companys employees totaled $1.9 million,
$2.0 million, and $1.8 million for the years ended
December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively.
|
|
Note 18
|
Deferred
compensation plan
|
In May 2005, the Companys Board of Directors approved the
adoption of a Deferred Compensation Plan (the Plan),
which became effective as of June 30, 2005. The Plan allows
certain highly compensated management, key employees and
directors of the Company to defer up to 80% of annual base
salary or director fees and up to 80% of annual bonus
compensation. Deferred amounts are credited with gains and
losses based on the performance of deemed investment options
selected by a committee appointed by the Board of Directors to
administer the Plan. The Plan also allows for discretionary
contributions to be made by the Company. Participants may
receive distributions upon (i) a pre-set date or schedule
that is elected during an appropriate election period,
(ii) the occurrence of unforeseeable financial emergencies,
(iii) termination of employment (including retirement),
(iv) death, (v) disability, or (vi) a change in
control of the Company, as defined in the Plan. Certain key
participants must wait six months following termination of
employment to receive distributions. The Plan is subject to
Internal Revenue Code Section 409A.
Assets placed in trust by the Company to fund future obligations
of the Plan resulting from employee compensation deferrals are
subject to the claims of creditors in the event of insolvency or
bankruptcy, and participants are general creditors of the
Company as to their deferred compensation in the Plan.
The Company may terminate the Plan at any time with respect to
participants providing services to the Company. Upon termination
of the Plan, participants will be paid out in accordance with
their prior distribution elections and otherwise in accordance
with the Plan. Upon and for twelve (12) months following a
change of
F-43
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
NOTES TO
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS (Continued)
control, the Company has the right to terminate the Plan and,
notwithstanding any elections made by participants, to pay out
all benefits in a lump sum, subject to the provisions of the
Internal Revenue Code. As of December 31, 2010, the Company
had approximately $6.2 million of accrued deferred
compensation liabilities under the Plan. Of that amount,
$0.7 million and $5.5 million have been classified as
current and non-current liabilities, respectively, within
Accrued salaries and employee benefits and
Other long-term liabilities.
|
|
Note 19
|
Quarterly
information (unaudited)
|
The following tables set forth the quarterly results of
operations for each quarter within the two-year period ended
December 31, 2010. The information for each of these
quarters is unaudited and has been prepared on the same basis as
the Companys audited consolidated financial statements. In
the opinion of management, all necessary adjustments, consisting
only of normal recurring accruals, have been included to fairly
present the unaudited quarterly results when read in conjunction
with the Companys audited consolidated financial
statements and related notes. The operating results of any
quarter are not necessarily indicative of results for any future
period.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
130,569
|
|
|
$
|
132,734
|
|
|
$
|
128,313
|
|
|
$
|
131,093
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
135,419
|
|
|
|
138,649
|
|
|
|
132,565
|
|
|
|
136,694
|
|
Cost of product sales (excluding acquisition-related intangible
amortization)
|
|
|
42,661
|
|
|
|
44,311
|
|
|
|
42,146
|
|
|
|
40,104
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
87,908
|
|
|
|
88,423
|
|
|
|
86,167
|
|
|
|
90,989
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
104,018
|
|
|
|
104,456
|
|
|
|
97,162
|
|
|
|
99,846
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
24,193
|
|
|
|
28,110
|
|
|
|
27,396
|
|
|
|
27,238
|
|
Net income per
share(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
0.49
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
|
$
|
0.57
|
|
|
$
|
0.56
|
|
|
$
|
0.56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
|
(In thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Product sales
|
|
$
|
112,522
|
|
|
$
|
116,816
|
|
|
$
|
118,951
|
|
|
$
|
135,470
|
|
Total revenues
|
|
|
116,183
|
|
|
|
120,545
|
|
|
|
122,704
|
|
|
|
138,870
|
|
Cost of product sales (excluding acquisition-related intangible
amortization)
|
|
|
33,314
|
|
|
|
38,280
|
|
|
|
36,345
|
|
|
|
44,454
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
79,208
|
|
|
|
78,536
|
|
|
|
82,606
|
|
|
|
91,016
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
83,213
|
|
|
|
97,301
|
|
|
|
93,667
|
|
|
|
104,007
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
25,747
|
|
|
|
19,815
|
|
|
|
22,196
|
|
|
|
24,025
|
|
Net income per
share(1):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
$
|
0.49
|
|
|
$
|
0.39
|
|
|
$
|
0.45
|
|
|
$
|
0.49
|
|
Diluted
|
|
$
|
0.49
|
|
|
$
|
0.38
|
|
|
$
|
0.44
|
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts shown may reflect rounding adjustments. |
|
|
Note 20
|
Subsequent
event
|
In February 2011, the Companys Board of Directors
authorized the repurchase of up to $150.0 million of the
Companys common stock over the one year period following
adoption of the program, through negotiated or open market
transactions. There is no minimum or maximum number of shares to
be repurchased under the program.
F-44
Schedule
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
GEN-PROBE
INCORPORATED
SCHEDULE II
VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
For Each
of the Three Years in the Period Ended December 31, 2010
(In
thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addition
|
|
|
|
Effect of
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at
|
|
Charged to
|
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
Balance at
|
|
|
Beginning
|
|
Cost and
|
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
End of
|
|
|
of Period
|
|
Expenses
|
|
Deductions(1)
|
|
Translation
|
|
Period
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2010:
|
|
$
|
516
|
|
|
$
|
271
|
|
|
$
|
(432
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
355
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009:
|
|
$
|
700
|
|
|
$
|
633
|
|
|
$
|
(817
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
516
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008:
|
|
$
|
719
|
|
|
$
|
9
|
|
|
$
|
(28
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
700
|
|
Inventory reserves:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2010:
|
|
$
|
9,538
|
|
|
$
|
1,943
|
|
|
$
|
(869
|
)
|
|
$
|
(173
|
)
|
|
$
|
10,439
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009:
|
|
$
|
5,694
|
|
|
$
|
4,457
|
|
|
$
|
(614
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
9,538
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008:
|
|
$
|
6,661
|
|
|
$
|
1,493
|
|
|
$
|
(2,460
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
5,694
|
|
Restructuring reserves:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2010:
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,121
|
|
|
$
|
(754
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
365
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2009:
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31, 2008:
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Deductions for Allowance for Doubtful Accounts and Inventory
Reserves are for accounts receivable written off and disposal of
obsolete inventory. Deductions for restructuring reserves are
for amounts paid. |
S-1
INDEX TO
EXHIBITS
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
2
|
.1(2)
|
|
Separation and Distribution Agreement, dated May 24, 2002,
and amended and restated as of August 6, 2002, between
Gen-Probe Incorporated and Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (now
Fujirebio, Inc.).
|
|
2
|
.2(30)
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of October 6, 2009,
by and among Gen-Probe Incorporated, Prodigy Acquisition Corp.,
Prodesse, Inc. and Thomas M. Shannon and R. Jeffrey Harris, as
the Securityholders Representative Committee.*
|
|
3
|
.1(2)
|
|
Form of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of
Gen-Probe Incorporated.
|
|
3
|
.2(6)
|
|
Certificate of Amendment of Amended and Restated Certificate of
Incorporation of Gen-Probe Incorporated.
|
|
3
|
.3(21)
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of Gen-Probe Incorporated.
|
|
3
|
.4(14)
|
|
Certificate of Elimination of the Series A Junior
Participating Preferred Stock of Gen-Probe Incorporated.
|
|
4
|
.1(2)
|
|
Specimen Common Stock Certificate.
|
|
10
|
.1(14)
|
|
The 2000 Equity Participation Plan of Gen-Probe Incorporated (as
last amended on November 16, 2006).
|
|
10
|
.2(14)
|
|
The 2000 Equity Participation Plan Form of Agreement and Grant
Notice for Non-Employee Directors (as last amended on
November 16, 2006).
|
|
10
|
.3(14)
|
|
The 2002 New Hire Stock Option Plan of Gen-Probe Incorporated
(as last amended on November 16, 2006).
|
|
10
|
.4(14)
|
|
The 2002 New Hire Stock Option Plan Form of Agreement and Grant
Notice (as last amended on November 16, 2006).
|
|
10
|
.5(25)
|
|
The 2003 Incentive Award Plan of Gen-Probe Incorporated (as last
amended effective as of May 14, 2009).
|
|
10
|
.6(14)
|
|
The 2003 Incentive Award Plan Form of Agreements and Grant
Notices (as last amended on February 8, 2007).
|
|
10
|
.7(10)
|
|
The 2003 Incentive Award Plan Form of Restricted Stock Award
Agreement and Grant Notice, as amended.
|
|
10
|
.8(28)
|
|
The 2003 Incentive Award Plan Form of Performance Stock Award
Grant Notice and Performance Stock Award Agreement.
|
|
10
|
.9(6)
|
|
Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Gen-Probe Incorporated, as
amended.
|
|
10
|
.10(15)
|
|
Gen-Probe Incorporated 2007 Executive Bonus Plan.
|
|
10
|
.11(32)
|
|
Gen-Probe Employee Bonus Plan.
|
|
10
|
.12(22)
|
|
Amended and Restated Gen-Probe Incorporated Deferred
Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2008.
|
|
10
|
.13(4)
|
|
Gen-Probe Incorporated
Change-In-Control
Severance Compensation Plan for Employees.
|
|
10
|
.14(22)
|
|
Amendment to Gen-Probe Incorporated
Change-in-Control
Severance Compensation Plan, dated October 2, 2008.
|
|
10
|
.15(31)
|
|
Restated Agreement dated as of July 24, 2009 by and between
Gen-Probe Incorporated and Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics,
Inc.*
|
|
10
|
.16(1)
|
|
Supplemental Agreement dated April 2, 2001 to the Agreement
dated June 11, 1998 for Development, Distribution and
Licensing of TMA Products between Gen-Probe Incorporated and
Bayer Corporation.*
|
|
10
|
.17(13)
|
|
Settlement Agreement dated August 1, 2006 among Gen-Probe
Incorporated, Bayer HealthCare LLC and Bayer Corporation.*
|
|
10
|
.18(34)
|
|
Second Amendment, effective as of July 1, 2009, to the
Collaboration Agreement dated June 11, 1998 by and between
Gen-Probe Incorporated and Siemens Healthcare Diagnostics Inc.
(as
successor-in-interest
to Bayer HealthCare LLC).*
|
|
10
|
.19(1)
|
|
Distribution Agreement dated May 2, 1997 between Gen-Probe
Incorporated and bioMérieux S.A.*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.20(3)
|
|
Distributorship Arrangements Agreement dated May 2, 1997
between Gen-Probe Incorporated and bioMérieux S.A.*
|
|
10
|
.21(1)
|
|
Renewal Amendment dated November 2, 1999 to the
Distribution Agreement and the Distributorship Arrangements
Agreement dated May 2, 1997 between Gen-Probe Incorporated
and bioMérieux S.A.
|
|
10
|
.22(1)
|
|
First Amendment dated August 4, 2000 to the Renewed
Distribution Agreement and the Distributorship Arrangements
Agreement dated May 2, 1997 between Gen-Probe Incorporated
and bioMérieux S.A.*
|
|
10
|
.23(6)
|
|
2003 Amendment dated May 2, 2003 to the Renewed
Distribution Agreement and the Distributorship Arrangements
Agreement dated May 2, 1997 between Gen-Probe Incorporated
and bioMérieux, S.A.*
|
|
10
|
.24(11)
|
|
2006 Amendment dated May 1, 2006 to the Renewed
Distributorship Agreement and the Distributorship Arrangements
Agreement dated May 2, 1997 between Gen-Probe Incorporated
and bioMérieux, S.A.
|
|
10
|
.25(3)
|
|
License Agreement dated July 1, 2001 between Gen-Probe
Incorporated and Chugai Diagnostics Science Co., Ltd. (now
Fujirebio, Inc.).
|
|
10
|
.26(3)
|
|
Distribution Agreement effective as of September 1, 1998
between Gen-Probe Incorporated and Chugai Diagnostics Science
Co., Ltd. (now Fujirebio, Inc.).
|
|
10
|
.27(3)
|
|
First Amendment dated June 30, 2002 to September 1,
1998 Distribution Agreement between Gen-Probe Incorporated and
Chugai Diagnostics Science Co., Ltd. (now Fujirebio, Inc.).
|
|
10
|
.28(3)
|
|
Co-Exclusive Agreement effective April 23, 1997 between
Gen-Probe Incorporated and The Board of Trustees of the Leland
Stanford Junior University.*
|
|
10
|
.29(1)
|
|
Amendment No. 1 effective April, 1998 to the License
Agreement effective April 23, 1997 between Stanford
University and Gen-Probe Incorporated.*
|
|
10
|
.30(3)
|
|
Non-Assertion Agreement dated February 7, 1997 between
Gen-Probe Incorporated and Organon Teknika B.V.*
|
|
10
|
.31(27)
|
|
Non-exclusive License Agreement under Vysis Collins
Patents dated June 22, 1999 between Gen-Probe Incorporated
and Vysis, Inc.
|
|
10
|
.32(7)
|
|
Settlement Agreement under Vysis Collins Patents effective
September 17, 2004 by and between Gen-Probe Incorporated
and Vysis, Inc.*
|
|
10
|
.33(7)
|
|
Amendment to Nonexclusive License Agreement under Vysis
Collins Patents dated September 17, 2004 by and between
Gen-Probe Incorporated and Vysis, Inc.*
|
|
10
|
.34(27)
|
|
Development, License and Supply Agreement effective
October 16, 2000 between Gen-Probe Incorporated and KMC
Systems, Inc.
|
|
10
|
.35(1)
|
|
First Amendment made as of September, 2001 to Agreement entered
into as of October 16, 2000 between Gen-Probe Incorporated
and KMC Systems, Inc.
|
|
10
|
.36(3)
|
|
Supply Agreement effective March 5, 1998 between Gen-Probe
Incorporated and Boehringer Mannheim GmbH.*
|
|
10
|
.37(1)
|
|
First Amendment effective February 21, 2001 between
Gen-Probe Incorporated and Roche Diagnostics GmbH (the
successor-in-interest
to Boehringer Mannheim GmbH) to the Supply Agreement effective
as of March 5, 1998 between Gen-Probe Incorporated and
Boehringer Mannheim GmbH.*
|
|
10
|
.38(8)
|
|
Second Amendment dated August 31, 2004 between Gen-Probe
Incorporated and Roche Diagnostics (the
successor-in-interest
to Boehringer Mannheim GmbH) to the Supply Agreement effective
as of March 5, 1998 between Gen-Probe Incorporated and
Boehringer Mannheim GmbH.*
|
|
10
|
.39(19)
|
|
Third Amendment effective January 1, 2007 between Gen-Probe
Incorporated and Roche Diagnostics (the
successor-in-interest
to Boehringer Mannheim GmbH) to the Supply Agreement effective
as of March 5, 1998 between Gen-Probe Incorporated and
Boehringer Mannheim GmbH.*
|
|
10
|
.40(5)
|
|
License, Development and Cooperation Agreement dated
November 19, 2003 between Gen-Probe Incorporated and
DiagnoCure Inc.*
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
10
|
.41(12)
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to License, Development and Cooperation
Agreement effective May 24, 2006 between Gen-Probe
Incorporated and DiagnoCure, Inc.*
|
|
10
|
.42(26)
|
|
Amendment No. 2 to License, Development and Cooperation
Agreement, effective as of April 28, 2009, between
Gen-Probe Incorporated and DiagnoCure, Inc.*
|
|
10
|
.43(6)
|
|
Supply Agreement dated January 1, 2002 between Gen-Probe
Incorporated and MGM Instruments, Inc.*
|
|
10
|
.44(6)
|
|
Supply Agreement Amendment Number One dated June 4, 2004
between Gen-Probe Incorporated and MGM Instruments, Inc.*
|
|
10
|
.45(9)
|
|
Supply and Purchase Agreement effective February 15, 2005
between Gen-Probe Incorporated, F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.
and Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.*
|
|
10
|
.46(16)
|
|
Development Agreement for Panther Instrument System effective
November 22, 2006 between Gen-Probe Incorporated and
STRATEC Biomedical Systems AG.*
|
|
10
|
.47(16)
|
|
Supply Agreement for Panther Instrument System effective
November 22, 2006 between
Gen-Probe
Incorporated and STRATEC Biomedical Systems AG.*
|
|
10
|
.48(16)
|
|
Letter Agreement regarding Development Agreement for Panther
Instrument System dated July 17, 2007 between Gen-Probe
Incorporated and STRATEC Biomedical Systems AG.*
|
|
10
|
.49(33)
|
|
Collaboration Agreement dated as of June 15, 2010 by and
between Gen-Probe Incorporated and Pacific Biosciences of
California, Inc.*
|
|
10
|
.50(23)
|
|
Credit Agreement dated as of February 27, 2009 by and
between Gen-Probe Incorporated, as Borrower, and Bank of
America, N.A., as Lender.
|
|
10
|
.51(23)
|
|
Security Agreement (Securities) dated as of February 27,
2009 by Gen-Probe Incorporated in favor of Bank of America, N.A.
|
|
10
|
.52(24)
|
|
Amendment to Credit Agreement dated as of March 23, 2009 by
and between Gen-Probe Incorporated, as Borrower, and Bank of
America, N.A., as Lender.
|
|
10
|
.53(29)
|
|
Amendment No. 2 to Credit Agreement dated as of
February 11, 2010 by and between Gen-Probe Incorporated, as
Borrower, and Bank of America, N.A., as Lender.
|
|
10
|
.54(35)
|
|
Amendment No. 3 to Credit Agreement dated as of
February 10, 2011 by and between Gen-Probe Incorporated, as
Borrower, and Bank of America, N.A., as Lender.
|
|
10
|
.55(26)
|
|
Amended and Restated Employment Agreement effective May 18,
2009 between Gen-Probe Incorporated and Carl W. Hull.
|
|
10
|
.56(26)
|
|
Form of Grant Notice and Deferred Issuance Restricted Stock
Award Agreement between Gen-Probe Incorporated and Carl W. Hull.
|
|
10
|
.57(17)
|
|
Employment Offer Letter between Gen-Probe Incorporated and
Christina Yang.
|
|
10
|
.58(22)
|
|
Amendment to Offer Letter Agreement effective October 31,
2008, between Gen-Probe Incorporated and Christina Yang.
|
|
10
|
.59(18)
|
|
Employment Offer Letter effective October 30, 2007 between
Gen-Probe Incorporated and Jorgine Ellerbrock.
|
|
10
|
.60(5)
|
|
Form of Employment Agreement Executive Team (executed by the
following executive officers: R. Bowen, D. De Walt, J.
Ellerbrock, D. Kacian, H. Rosenman and C. Yang).
|
|
10
|
.61(15)
|
|
Form of First Amendment to Employment Agreement for Executive
Vice Presidents and Vice Presidents, effective March 1,
2007 (executed by the following officers: R. Bowen, D. De Walt,
P. Gargan, D. Kacian and H. Rosenman).
|
|
10
|
.62(20)
|
|
Form of Employment Agreement Executive Team as approved in
September 2008 (executed by the following executive officers: E.
Lai and E. Tardif).
|
|
10
|
.63(22)
|
|
Form of First Amendment to Employment Agreement effective
October 2008 (executed by the following officers: J. Ellerbrock
and C. Yang).
|
|
10
|
.64(22)
|
|
Form of Second Amendment to Employment Agreement effective
October 2008 (executed by the following officers: R. Bowen, D.
De Walt, P. Gargan, D. Kacian and H. Rosenman).
|
|
10
|
.65(2)
|
|
Form of Indemnification Agreement between Gen-Probe Incorporated
and its Executive Officers and Directors.
|
|
21
|
.1
|
|
List of subsidiaries of Gen-Probe Incorporated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification dated February 23, 2011, of Principal
Executive Officer required pursuant to 18 USC.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification dated February 23, 2011, of Principal
Financial Officer required pursuant to 18 USC.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.1**
|
|
Certification dated February 23, 2011, of Principal
Executive Officer required pursuant to 18 USC.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.2**
|
|
Certification dated February 23, 2011, of Principal
Financial Officer required pursuant to 18 USC.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
|
101
|
.1**
|
|
Interactive Data Files pursuant to Rule 405 of
Regulation S-T.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filed herewith. |
|
|
|
Indicates management contract or compensatory plan, contract or
arrangement. |
|
* |
|
Gen-Probe has been granted confidential treatment with respect
to certain portions of this exhibit. |
|
** |
|
Furnished herewith. |
|
(1) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Registration
Statement on Form 10 filed with the SEC on May 24,
2002. |
|
(2) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Amendment
No. 2 to Registration Statement on Form 10 filed with
the SEC on August 14, 2002. |
|
(3) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Amendment
No. 3 to Registration Statement on Form 10 filed with
the SEC on September 5, 2002. |
|
(4) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Annual Report on
Form 10-K
filed with the SEC on March 24, 2003 (File
No. 001-31279). |
|
(5) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Annual Report on
Form 10-K
filed with the SEC on March 9, 2004 (File
No. 001-31279). |
|
(6) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on August 9, 2004 (File
No. 001-31279). |
|
(7) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on November 9, 2004 (File
No. 001-31279). |
|
(8) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Annual Report on
Form 10-K
filed with the SEC on March 15, 2005 (File
No. 001-31279). |
|
(9) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on May 10, 2005 (File
No. 001-31279). |
|
(10) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on December 6, 2005 (File
No. 001-31279). |
|
(11) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on May 5, 2006. |
|
(12) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on August 3, 2006. |
|
(13) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on November 1, 2006. |
|
(14) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Annual Report on
Form 10-K
filed with the SEC on February 23, 2007. |
|
(15) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on May 1, 2007. |
|
(16) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on November 5, 2007. |
|
(17) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on May 2, 2007. |
|
|
|
(18) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on November 19, 2007. |
|
(19) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-K
filed with the SEC on February 25, 2008. |
|
(20) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on October 31, 2008. |
|
(21) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on February 18, 2009. |
|
(22) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Annual Report on
Form 10-K
filed with the SEC on February 25, 2009. |
|
(23) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on March 4, 2009. |
|
(24) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on March 25, 2009. |
|
(25) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on May 19, 2009. |
|
(26) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on August 6, 2009. |
|
(27) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on November 5, 2009. |
|
(28) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on
Form 8-K
with respect to Items 5.02 and 9.01 filed with the SEC on
February 16, 2010. |
|
(29) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on
Form 8-K
with respect to Items 1.01, 2.03 and 9.01 filed with the
SEC on February 16, 2010. |
|
(30) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Annual Report on
Form 10-K
filed with the SEC on February 25, 2010. |
|
(31) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Amendment
No. 1 to Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q/A
filed with the SEC on April 14, 2010. |
|
(32) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on May 5, 2010. |
|
(33) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on August 4, 2010. Changes were made to
portions of this exhibit in Gen-Probes Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on November 3, 2010, which is also
incorporated by reference. |
|
(34) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report
on
Form 10-Q
filed with the SEC on November 3, 2010. |
|
(35) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on
Form 8-K
filed with the SEC on February 15, 2011. |