Table of Contents
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
| x | ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended December 29, 2012
OR
| ¨ | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission file number: 001-33486
Infinera Corporation
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
| Delaware | 77-0560433 | |
| (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) |
(IRS Employer Identification No.) |
140 Caspian Court
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)
(408) 572-5200
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
| Title of Each Class |
Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered | |
| Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value | The 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 ¨ No x
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes ¨ No x
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s 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. ¨
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 definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
| Large accelerated filer ¨ | Accelerated filer x | Non-accelerated filer ¨ | Smaller reporting company ¨ | |||||
| (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | ||||||||
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No x
The aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock, $0.001 par value per share, held by non-affiliates of the registrant on June 29, 2012, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately $509,611,108 (based on the closing sales price of the registrant’s common stock on that date). Shares of the registrant’s common stock held by each officer and director and each person who owns more than 5% or more of the outstanding common stock of the registrant have been excluded in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes. As of February 25, 2013, 115,393,300 shares of the registrant’s common stock, $0.001 par value per share, were issued and outstanding.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
| (1) | Portions of the registrant’s Proxy Statement for its 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K where indicated. |
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K
For the Fiscal Year Ended December 29, 2012
Table of Contents
| ITEM 1. | BUSINESS |
Overview
Infinera Corporation (“we” or “Infinera”) provides optical networking equipment, software and services to communications service providers, internet content providers, cable operators and subsea network operators (collectively, “Service Providers”) across the globe. Optical networks are deployed by Service Providers facing significant demands for transmission capacity prompted by increased use of high-speed Internet access, 3G/4G mobile broadband, business Ethernet services, cloud-based services and wholesale bandwidth services. We first introduced the Infinera Digital Optical Network architecture to Service Providers in 2004. This architecture is based on optical network platforms built with Infinera’s unique photonic integrated circuits (“PICs”). As of December 29, 2012, 111 Service Providers have selected Infinera’s optical architecture platform to efficiently grow and manage their optical networks.
Infinera manufactures what we believe to be the world’s only commercially-deployed, large-scale PICs, which are used as a key differentiating component inside our optical transport platforms. Our first generation PICs transmit and receive 100 Gigabits per second (“Gbps”) of optical transmission capacity and incorporate the functionality of over 60 discrete optical functions into a pair of indium phosphide chips approximately the size of a fingernail. Our next-generation PICs, now commercially available, transmit and receive 500 Gbps, incorporating over 600 discrete optical functions into a pair of indium phosphide chips. Our PICs are combined with high-performance Optical Transport Network (“OTN”) switching capabilities in our Digital Optical Network architecture to offer Service Providers a unique combination of highly-scalable transmission capacity and bandwidth management tools to efficiently and simply utilize such capacity across platforms.
Many Service Providers are looking for new network architectures to respond to continued demand for bandwidth across their networks. These architectural changes include scaling optical transmission capacities from 10 Gbps and 40 Gbps to 100 Gbps and integrating OTN switching capabilities within the optical transport platform. Infinera’s DTN platform currently supports 10 Gbps and 40 Gbps transmission capacity combined with integrated switching capabilities. Infinera’s DTN-X platform supports 100 Gbps transmission capacity with 500 Gbps super-channels and also integrates our 5 terabits per second (“Tbps”) OTN switch in a single bay. The DTN-X platform leverages the unique capabilities of our 500 Gbps PICs to deliver high-capacity transmission while optimizing power, cooling, space and operational simplicity.
Similar to how silicon integrated circuits changed the dynamics of the computing industry by increasing computing performance and reliability while reducing physical size, power consumption and heat dissipation, we believe Infinera’s PICs change the dynamics of the optical network industry by increasing optical performance and reliability while reducing physical size, power consumption and heat dissipation. We fabricate PICs and develop the software and hardware that together comprise the optical network platforms at the foundation of our Digital Optical Network architecture. We sell these optical network platforms to Service Providers along with a comprehensive suite of installation, management and support services. We believe that Service Providers facing increasing demand for greater optical network transmission capacity and the need for more favorable network economics will adopt our DTN-X platform.
“Infinera,” “Infinera DTN,” “Infinera DTN-X,” “ATN,” “Infinera Digital Optical Network,” “FlexCoherent,” “Infinera Instant Bandwidth,” and other trademarks or service marks of Infinera Corporation appearing in this report are the property of Infinera Corporation. This report contains additional trade names, trademarks and service marks of other companies. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trade names, trademarks or service marks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, these other companies.
Infinera was founded in December 2000, originally operated under the name “Zepton Networks,” and is headquartered in Sunnyvale, California. We are incorporated in the State of Delaware. Our principal executive offices are located at 140 Caspian Court, Sunnyvale, CA 94089. Our telephone number is (408) 572-5200.
1
Table of Contents
Industry Background
Optical networking equipment carries digital information using light waves over fiber optic networks. The advent of wavelength division multiplexing (“WDM”) systems has enabled the transmission of larger amounts of data by using multiple wavelengths over a single optical fiber. Service Providers often use WDM systems to carry communications traffic between cities, referred to as long-haul networks, and within large metropolitan areas, referred to as metro networks. Fiber optic networks are generally capable of carrying most types of communications traffic, from conventional long-distance telephone calls, to e-mails, web sessions and to high-definition video streaming. As service traffic grows, Service Providers add transmission capacity to existing optical networks or purchase and deploy additional systems to keep pace with bandwidth demands and service expansion.
We believe that a number of trends in the communications industry are increasing demand for network capacity and ultimately will increase demand for optical networking systems. These trends include growth in bandwidth-intensive services like video, the proliferation of 4G and WiFi mobile broadband due to the availability of smartphones and tablets, the emergence of cloud services and the continued expansion of online business and information services.
We believe that Service Providers seek the following solutions that will allow them to increase their profit margins and/or expand their service offerings:
| • | high-capacity solutions that scale transmission capacity to meet increasing bandwidth demand; |
| • | efficient solutions that optimize performance and increase reliability while reducing physical space, power consumption and heat dissipation; |
| • | easy to use solutions that reduce the time to deploy new transmission capacity while lowering operational expenses; and |
| • | improved integration between Internet Protocol equipment such as routers and optical networking equipment. |
We believe that Infinera’s Digital Optical Network architecture is uniquely enabled to deliver improvements in these areas compared to competitive WDM systems that still rely on discrete optical components. We believe that our Digital Optical Network architecture enables Service Providers to deploy reliable, high-capacity, efficient optical network solutions that are easy to use and improve the integration between the layers of Service Provider networks with the lowest Total Cost of Ownership.
The Infinera Strategy
Our goal is to be a preeminent provider of optical networking systems to Service Providers around the world. Key aspects of our strategy to achieve this goal are as follows:
| • | Increasing our customer base. We continue to diversify our customer base across multiple customer segments including, long-haul network operators, regional and metro network operators, Tier 1 telecommunications service providers, bandwidth wholesalers, subsea network operators, cable multiple systems operators (“MSOs”) and internet content providers. In 2013 and beyond, we intend to increase our penetration with existing customers while leveraging our new DTN-X platform to target, in particular, Tier 1 U.S. and international telecommunications service providers, including U.S. regional Bell operating companies, international postal, telephone and telegraph companies, and other operators of fiber optic networks around the world. In 2012, we increased our presence outside of the United States, with the addition of new customers in Europe and Asia Pacific (“APAC”), as well as deployments in the Other Americas. We also had continued success in the submarine market, as subsea network operators deployed Infinera systems over existing subsea networks to increase capacity and utilize the efficiencies of our Digital Optical Network. |
| • | Penetrating adjacent markets. We believe that our Digital Optical Network architecture can further benefit submarine network operators and operators with networks that extend to the metro edge. We intend to increase our addressable markets by continually adding functionality to our products and by developing the service and support infrastructure needed to address these markets. |
2
Table of Contents
| • | Maintaining and extending our technology lead. We intend to continue to incorporate the functionality of additional discrete functions into our PICs in order to continue to increase our technology lead. In addition, we will pursue the expansion of our digital switching and bandwidth management capabilities in order to enhance the performance, scalability and economic advantages of our products. |
| • | Continuing investment in PIC manufacturing activities. We believe that our vertical integration and manufacturing capabilities serve as a competitive advantage and intend to continue to invest in the manufacturing capabilities needed to produce new generations of PICs. |
Products
Infinera DTN Platform
The Infinera DTN platform utilizes our PIC technology to enable digital processing and management of data with the capability to generate WDM wavelengths and to add, drop, switch, manage, protect and restore network traffic digitally using integrated OTN switching. The DTN platform can automate the connection of circuits and provisioning of new services without costly and cumbersome manual intervention.
Our DTN platform is modular in design to provide Service Providers with the ability to add capacity in a cost-efficient manner. The initial deployment of our DTN platform at a customer site involves the installation of a line system (including common equipment, such as a chassis, amplifiers, management controllers and related equipment). Service Providers can increase the capacity of the DTN platform by purchasing our Digital Line Modules, Tributary Adapter Modules and Tributary Optical Modules. We believe that the density and the modular architecture of the DTN platform enable significant flexibility and scalability for Service Providers. Our current DTN platform delivers 10 Gbps and 40 Gbps wavelengths enabling fiber capacity from 1.6 Tbps to 6.4 Tbps.
Our DTN platform is carrier-class, which means that it complies with applicable Telcordia and equivalent major international standards for central office-based network elements. Our DTN platform supports a broad range of optical service interfaces including Ethernet (1 Gigabit Ethernet (“GbE”), 10 GbE, 40 GbE and 100GbE) and separate synchronous optical network/synchronous digital hierarchy.
Infinera DTN Platform for Submarine Network Applications
For submarine transport applications, the DTN platform can be used as a Submarine Line Terminating Equipment (“SLTE”) node, doubling the total optical capacity of many traditional submarine systems to a maximum of up to 6.4 Tbps and distances of up to 8,000 km. The DTN platform also provides dispersion compensation that is significantly simpler and cheaper than the per-channel dispersion management of many existing SLTE systems. Our DTN platform leverages its digital operations and software automation to allow Infinera’s SLTE solution to significantly reduce engineering complexity for submarine cable upgrades and to enable lower cost, faster deployment of additional capacity on existing systems.
Infinera Line System
Infinera’s Digital Optical Network platforms are built upon and connected to one another using an optical “line system.” The Infinera Line System (“ILS”) provides optical amplification and enables the management communication channels between network nodes. ILS currently supports up to 6.4 Tbps of optical capacity on a single fiber using the DTN platform and up to 8 Tbps of capacity using the DTN-X platform. ILS is fully integrated into Infinera’s management and control software and can be managed seamlessly across platforms. Infinera’s bandwidth management capabilities allow our customers to manage and utilize the available capacity as a single pool of bandwidth to satisfy customer requirements, including services at speeds from 1 Gbps up to 100 Gbps.
Infinera DTN-X Platform
Commercial shipments of the Infinera DTN-X platform began in the second quarter of 2012 and we recognized significant revenue from the platform in the second half of the year. The DTN-X platform is based on our third generation 500 Gbps PICs that integrate more than 600 discrete optical functions delivering the world’s first 500 Gbps FlexCoherent super-channels, based on 100 Gbps per channel. The DTN-X platform delivers a step function improvement in network economics to help Service Providers more efficiently manage the explosive
3
Table of Contents
growth of traffic brought on by video, mobile and cloud-based services. The DTN-X platform is a next-generation multi-terabit packet optical transport platform that is fundamentally three products in one:
| • | a dense WDM (“DWDM”) transmission system based on the world’s first 500 Gbps super-channels, unleashing cost-effective DWDM transmission capacity; |
| • | an integrated OTN switching system that will scale from 5 Tbps in its first release and up to 100 Tbps in the future and will enable operators to efficiently manage larger data transmission with grooming of traffic down to 1 Gbps granularity; and |
| • | a system that is designed to be upgradeable to Multi-Protocol Label Switching (“MPLS”) switching in the future which will help further enable convergence of the network for improved efficiency, reducing the number interconnections between network layers. |
We believe that the convergence of network layers can only be achieved when the best in class performance of each individual layer is realized in a single platform. In most competitive solutions, a Service Provider must make a choice between maximizing either the system’s transmission capacity or its OTN switching capability. The DTN-X platform, unlike other competitive offerings, was designed to converge switching with DWDM transport without compromising overall system functionality. The purpose-built design centers around three unique technology building blocks – PICs paired with a FlexCoherent Processor, custom switching application-specific integrated circuits (“ASICs”) and intelligent Generalized MPLS (“GMPLS”) software. We believe that it is the only platform available in the market that will allow all components, including the optical functions based on our PIC technology, to scale in a manner consistent with Moore’s Law-like semiconductor manufacturing economics and, therefore, deliver simultaneously best-of-breed switching, integrated with best-of-breed DWDM.
Infinera ATN Platform
The Infinera ATN platform is a state-of-the-art coarse WDM and DWDM aggregation and transport solution designed with 400 Gbps of total capacity. The ATN platform can be used to extend the Digital Optical Network architecture benefits of the DTN and DTN-X platforms, and can also be used as a standalone WDM access system.
Implementing numerous features in support of simplicity of use and operation, the ATN platform is a cost-effective, efficient multiservice aggregation and transport platform. The ATN platform supports direct wavelength connectivity to DTN and DTN-X nodes, reducing equipment costs and providing unique network management capabilities across our integrated Digital Optical Networks.
Infinera IQ Network Operating System
The Infinera IQ Network Operating System is our embedded software operating system, which enables our Service Providers to simplify and speed up the tasks they perform to deliver, differentiate, and manage services and to optimize the utilization of their networks. The IQ Network Operating System for the DTN and DTN-X platforms utilize GMPLS for end-to-end provisioning, protection and restoration services, and a host of performance monitoring and software-definable testing capabilities. The ATN platform supports end-to-end provisioning through software features similar to the DTN and DTN-X platforms.
Infinera Management Suite
The Infinera Management Suite is a broad set of standards-based network and element management tools and operations support system integration interfaces that are used by Service Providers to manage their DTN, DTN-X and ATN platforms. Our management suite software includes our Digital Network Administrator, a scalable, robust, feature-rich element management system, and our Graphical Node Manager, an easy-to-use web-based management interface. Our hardware products, the DTN, DTN-X and ATN platforms, are managed in an integrated fashion by the Infinera Management Suite.
Technology
Digital Optical Network Architecture
Infinera was founded with a vision of increasing the functionality and improving the economics of optical transport systems. To that end, our core engineering team consists of optical component and systems experts who
4
Table of Contents
have collaborated to create an innovative optical networking architecture that combines the delivery of large amounts of low-cost bandwidth with distributed switching and the embedded software intelligence of bandwidth management to manage larger networks and deliver high-capacity services quickly and cost-effectively. We have focused our efforts, time and capital on developing our Digital Optical Network architecture and our system products.
Our Digital Optical Network architecture is designed to allow our customers to expand service reach, expedite service provisioning, ensure reliability and more effectively manage, monitor and scale their networks by processing data digitally rather than in analog format. We believe that the key to delivering this capability in a cost-effective manner is integrating the functionality of multiple discrete devices into a single set of semiconductor chips. This integration allows us to eliminate separate optical packages for each discrete optical device, which we believe is the largest cost challenge facing traditional systems. This integration has further enabled us to provide additional functionality and intelligence to our optical networking systems.
Infinera PICs
We believe that our proprietary PICs are a key source of our value proposition and competitive advantage. We manufacture and package our PICs at our own facilities for use exclusively with our DTN and DTN-X platforms. We began the design and manufacture of our PICs shortly after we were founded in December 2000. We employ a multi-disciplinary approach towards the development and manufacture of our PICs, with significant interaction between our manufacturing, system engineering and advanced technology groups. As a leader in the development of photonic integration, we have protected the intellectual property associated with our PIC manufacturing through a combination of trade secrets, patents and contractual protections. We believe that as a result of the combination of the multiple disciplines that were required to develop our PIC, together with the intellectual property protections that we have established, it will be difficult for others to duplicate the technology we have developed.
Our DTN and DTN-X platforms transmit optical capacity, in increments of 100 Gbps and 500 Gbps, respectively, utilizing a pair of PICs. Our 100 Gbps PICs integrate the functionality of 60 optical functions onto a pair of chips, and our 500 Gbps PICs have increased this integration to over 600 discrete functions per pair of chips. We believe that large-scale photonic integration enables significantly improved manufacturing economics to optical networking, allowing future optical transport cost reductions to be viably sustained on a cost curve defined by volume manufacturing efficiencies, greater functional integration, increased device density, and manufacturing yield enhancements.
Infinera FlexCoherent Processor
The term “coherent transmission” generally implies the combination of a number of technologies used to transmit data over optical networks. These optical transmission methodologies are based on varying optical technologies, namely: phase modulation, polarization multiplexing, coherent detection and advanced digital signal processing. These “coherent technologies” are used by Service Providers to enable higher data capacities to be transmitted over their existing optical fiber infrastructure, typically using the same or better design rules than those used for 10 Gbps transmission. Typically, a coherent transmitter uses a more complex optical circuit and requires a significantly greater number of optical components than more traditional non-coherent transmission methodologies. Infinera has integrated proprietary coherent technologies onto our FlexCoherent Processor, which works in conjunction with our 500 Gbps PICs to construct a single module. This module incorporates our long-haul FlexCoherent 500 Gbps WDM super-channels with software selectable modulation formats and exceptional optical performance.
Super-Channels
Infinera’s DTN-X platform supports five channels of 100 Gbps capacity in a single line card. This 500 Gbps pool of bandwidth is managed as a super-channel that can be deployed in a single operational motion. Competitive solutions would require the installation of five discrete line modules, each turned up with its own operational motion, in order to achieve the same system capacity. This results in competitive advantages not only in the areas of space, power consumption and long-term system reliability, but also a significant reduction in time to service and operational costs.
5
Table of Contents
In November of 2012, we introduced the Infinera Instant Bandwidth program, which enables Service Providers to license the 500 Gbps super-channel pool of bandwidth in 100 Gbps increments. With the Infinera Instant Bandwidth program, Service Providers can instantly provision an additional 100G of transmission capacity on demand without the deployment of any incremental equipment. The Instant Bandwidth program is uniquely enabled by Infinera’s super-channel capability.
Integrated OTN Switching
OTN offers a highly-structured approach to service multiplexing and switching and enables customers to reduce operational costs and more efficiently utilize higher-capacity bandwidth in their long-haul networks. Historically, the OTN switching and DWDM transport functions have been deployed by Service Providers in separate systems. Our unique PIC technology allows our DTN-X platform to fully integrate DWDM transport and OTN switching capabilities in a single platform, without compromising overall system functionality or capacity. This is achieved by reducing the number of elements and fiber connections in the network, as well as lowering space and power requirements. This results in an improved total cost of ownership for the customer.
Customers
As of December 29, 2012, we have sold our Digital Optical Networks for deployment to 111 customers worldwide, including customers in each of the following segments:
| • | Tier-1 domestic carrier; |
| • | Tier-1 international carrier; |
| • | MSO/cable; |
| • | internet content provider; |
| • | incumbent carrier; |
| • | research and education/government; and |
| • | bandwidth wholesaler. |
Some of our announced customers include CenturyLink, Telefonica, Cable&Wireless Worldwide, TeliaSonera International Carrier, Colt, Cox Communications, Deutsche Telekom, Equinix, Inc., Interoute, KVH, Level 3 Communications (“Level 3”), NTT, OTE, Pacnet and XO Communications. In addition, we currently have 41 customer deployments where customers have purchased our ATN platform to extend the Digital Optical Network experience to their metro edge deployments. We do not have long-term sales commitments from our customers. We had no customer that represented over 10% of our revenue for 2012 and 2011 and one customer that represented over 10% of our revenue for 2010.
Support and Services
We offer our customers a range of product offerings, including 24/7/365 technical support for all hardware and software products, a full range of deployment and installation services, spares management, first line maintenance services, on-site technical services, professional services, product technical training and extended product warranties. In 2012, we expanded all services to cover over 60 countries. We continue to increase our outsourced network monitoring and management services, provided from our two Technical Assistance Centers—one in Annapolis Junction, Maryland, and the other in the United Kingdom. We also expanded our technical support capabilities in APAC to include a facility in Hong Kong, providing a local environment for product demonstrations, training and support. Our customer support services are provided by our employees and augmented where necessary by strategic support partners. We believe that providing ongoing customer and technical support is critical to successful long-term relationships with, and follow-on sales to, our customers. We are committed to providing our customers with the highest levels of technical support and service on a global scale.
6
Table of Contents
Sales and Marketing
We market and sell our products and related support services primarily through our direct sales force, supported by marketing and product management personnel. We may also use distribution or support partners to enter new markets or when requested by a potential customer. Our sales team has significant previous experience with the buying process and sales cycles typical of high-value telecommunications products. We expect to continue to add sales and support employees as we grow our business.
The sales process for our products entails discussions with prospective customers, analyzing their existing networks and identifying how they can utilize our systems capabilities within their networks. This process requires developing strong customer relationships, and we expect to leverage our sales force and customer support capabilities to establish relationships with both domestic and international Service Providers.
Over the course of the sales cycle, Service Providers often test our products before buying. Prior to commercial deployment, the Service Provider will generally perform a field trial of our products. Upon successful completion, the Service Provider generally accepts the products installed in its network and may continue with commercial deployment of additional products. We anticipate that our sales cycle, from initial contact with a Service Provider through the signing of a purchase agreement, may, in some cases, take several quarters.
Direct Sales Force. Our sales team sells directly to Service Providers worldwide. We maintain sales presences throughout the United States, as well as in a number of international locations, including Argentina, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Russia, and the United Kingdom. We expanded our sales force during 2012 as we prepared to address new geographical markets and to support the sales of our expanded portfolio of products. We expect any incremental sales headcount additions in the near-term to be limited to areas where sales achievements are ahead of planned amounts.
Indirect Sales Force. We have and will continue to employ business consultants, resale partners and sales agents to assist in our sales efforts and to accelerate and strengthen our customer relationships. We expect to work with business partners to assist our customers in the sale, deployment and maintenance of our systems and have entered into distribution and resale agreements to facilitate the sale of our products.
Marketing and Product Management. Our product management team is responsible for defining the product features and development plan required to maximize our success in the marketplace. Product management supports our sales efforts with product and application expertise. Our marketing team works to create demand for our products by communicating our value proposition and differentiation through direct customer interaction, public relations, attendance at tradeshows and other events, and via the Internet and other marketing channels.
Research and Development
Continued investment in research and development is critical to our business. To this end, we have assembled a team of engineers with expertise in various fields, including systems, sub-systems and components. Our research and development efforts are currently focused in Sunnyvale, California; Allentown, Pennsylvania; Beijing, China; Bangalore, India; and Kanata, Canada. We have invested significant time and financial resources into the development of our Digital Optical Network architecture, and our DTN-X, DTN and ATN platforms, including the IQ Network Operating System and Management Suite software. We will continue to expand our product offerings and capabilities in the future and plan to dedicate significant resources to these continued research and development efforts. We are continually increasing the scalability and software features of our current platforms. We are also working to develop new generations of PICs, and we intend to enable further integration in our Digital Optical Network architecture through continued research and development.
Our research and development expenses were $117.2 million, $127.1 million and $118.5 million in 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Employees
As of December 29, 2012, we had 1,242 employees. A total of 431 of those employees were located outside of the United States. None of our U.S. employees are subject to a collective bargaining agreement. Employees in
7
Table of Contents
certain foreign jurisdictions may be represented by local workers’ councils and/or collective bargaining agreements, as may be customary or required in those jurisdictions. We have not experienced any work stoppages, and we consider our employee relationships to be good.
Manufacturing
We have invested significant time and capital to develop and improve the manufacturing process that we use to produce and package our PICs. This includes significant investments in personnel, equipment and the facilities needed to manufacture and package our PICs in Sunnyvale, California and Allentown, Pennsylvania. We also have invested in automating our manufacturing process and in training and maintaining the quality of our manufacturing workforce. As a leader in the development of photonic integration, our manufacturing processes have been developed over several years and are protected by a significant number of trade secrets. We believe that the trade secrets associated with the manufacturing and packaging of our PICs provide us with a significant competitive advantage.
We use both domestic and international manufacturing partners to manufacture certain components of our products. Our contract manufacturers manufacture our products based on our specifications and bill of materials. In addition, the lead times associated with certain components are lengthy and preclude rapid changes in product specifications or delivery schedules. Although we experienced some delays in late 2011 in connection with the floods in Thailand, to date, we have not experienced any significant delays or material unanticipated costs resulting from the use of these contract manufacturers; however, such a strategy involves certain risks, including the potential absence of adequate capacity, the unavailability of or interruptions in access to certain process technologies, and reduced control over delivery schedules, manufacturing yields, quality and costs. Despite outsourcing manufacturing operations for cost-effective scale and flexibility, we perform rigorous in-house quality control testing to ensure the reliability of our products. Our supply chain risk mitigation strategies are continuous and are institutionalized in our supply chain design for external manufacturing and for procurement of components. By design, we have three contract manufacturers in three different countries, in a low cost region (one in China), as well as the capability to redirect manufacturing to U.S. qualified factories of two electronic manufacturing services partners.
Shortages in components that we use in our products are possible and our ability to predict the availability of such components may be limited. Some of these components are available only from single or limited sources of supply. Our products include some components that are proprietary in nature and only available from a single source, as well as some components that are generally available from a number of suppliers. We have increased our reliance on third parties to develop and manufacture components for our products. In some cases, significant time would be required to establish relationships with alternate suppliers or providers of proprietary components. We do not have any long-term contracts with any component providers that guarantee supply of components or their manufacturing services. If we encounter difficulty continuing our relationship with a supplier, or if a supplier is unable to meet our needs, we may encounter manufacturing delays that could adversely affect our business. Our ability to timely deliver products to our customers would be materially adversely impacted if we needed to qualify replacements for any of a number of the components used in our products.
In 2011, we expanded our PIC fabrication (“PIC FAB”) manufacturing facility in Sunnyvale, California in preparation for volume shipments of our 500 Gbps PICs, which commenced in the second quarter of 2012.
We believe that our current manufacturing facilities can accommodate an increase in capacity for PIC production sufficient for our current product offerings.
Backlog
As of December 29, 2012, our backlog was $58.4 million. These orders are subject to future events that could cause the amount or timing of the related revenue to change, and, in certain cases, may be cancelled without penalty. We do not believe that backlog should be viewed as an indicator of future performance. A backlogged order may not result in revenue in a particular period, and the actual revenue may not be equal to our backlog amounts. Our presentation of backlog may not be comparable with that of other companies in our industry.
8
Table of Contents
Competition
The optical communications network equipment market is highly competitive. Competition in this market is based on any one or a combination of the following factors:
| • | price and other commercial terms; |
| • | functionality; |
| • | existing business and customer relationships; |
| • | the ability of products and services to meet customers’ immediate and future network requirements; |
| • | installation capability; |
| • | services; |
| • | scalability; and |
| • | manufacturing capability. |
Competition in the optical networking market is dominated by a number of very large, multi-national companies. Many of our competitors have substantially greater name recognition and technical, financial, and marketing resources, and greater manufacturing capacity, as well as better established relationships with the incumbent carriers, than we do. Many of our competitors have more resources to develop or acquire, and more experience in developing or acquiring, new products and technologies and in creating market awareness for these products and technologies. In addition, many of our competitors have the financial resources to offer competitive products at below market pricing levels that could prevent us from competing effectively. Further, many of our competitors have built long-standing relationships with some of our prospective customers and a number of competitors have the ability to provide financing to customers and could, therefore, have an inherent advantage in selling products to those customers.
Our competitors include current WDM suppliers, such as Alcatel-Lucent, Ciena Corporation, Cisco Systems, Ericsson, Fujitsu Limited, Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd., NEC Corporation, Tellabs and ZTE Corporation. These companies have historically set the competitive benchmarks for price and functionality. There are also smaller companies, including startups, that have announced plans or developed products that would compete for long-haul and metro optical transport business. We also face additional competition in certain market segments from companies which offer one or more products that compete directly or indirectly with our products. In addition, we may compete with other companies as we expand into new markets or as other companies develop products that are competitive with us.
Intellectual Property
Our success as a company depends upon our ability to protect our core technology and intellectual property. To accomplish this, we rely on a combination of intellectual property rights, including patents, trade secrets, copyrights and trademarks, as well as customary contractual protections.
We rely primarily on trade secret protection for our PIC and PIC manufacturing processes, including design, fabrication and testing of our PICs. However, there can be no assurances that trade secrets will be sufficient to provide us with a competitive advantage or that others have not or will not reverse engineer our designs or discover, develop or disclose the same or similar designs and manufacturing processes.
As of December 29, 2012, we held 212 U.S. patents and 35 international patents expiring between 2021 and 2031, and held 168 U.S. and 74 foreign pending patent applications. We do not know whether any of our pending patent applications will result in the issuance of patents or whether the examination process will require us to narrow our claims.
We may not receive competitive advantages from the rights granted under our patents and other intellectual property. Any patents granted to us may be contested, circumvented or invalidated over the course of our business, and we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing these patents. Therefore, the exact effect of the protection of these patents cannot be predicted with certainty.
9
Table of Contents
We believe that the frequency of assertions of patent infringement is increasing as patent holders, including entities that are not in our industry and who purchase patents as an investment or to monetize such rights by obtaining royalties, use such actions as a competitive tactic as well as a source of additional revenue. We have been sued by Cheetah Omni LLC (“Cheetah”) and Cambrian Science Corporation (“Cambrian”) for alleged infringement of their patents. See the section set forth in Item 3. “Legal Proceedings” for additional information regarding these lawsuits. Any claim of infringement from a third party, even those without merit, could cause us to incur substantial costs defending against such claims, and could distract our management from running our business. Furthermore, a party making such a claim, if successful, could secure a judgment that requires us to pay substantial damages. A judgment could also include an injunction or other court order that could prevent us from selling our products. In addition, we might be required to seek a license for the use of such intellectual property, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Alternatively, we may be required to develop non-infringing technology, which would require significant effort and expense and may ultimately not be successful.
In addition to trade secret and patent protections, we generally control access to and the use of our proprietary software and other confidential information. This protection is accomplished through a combination of internal and external controls, including contractual protections with employees, contractors, customers, and partners, and through a combination of U.S. and international copyright laws. We incorporate a number of third-party software programs into our products pursuant to license agreements.
We license some of our software pursuant to agreements that impose restrictions on our customers’ ability to use such software, such as prohibiting reverse engineering and limiting the use of copies. We also seek to avoid disclosure of our intellectual property by relying on non-disclosure and assignment of intellectual property agreements with our employees and consultants that acknowledge our exclusive ownership of all intellectual property developed by the individual during the course of his or her work with us. The agreements also require that each person maintain the confidentiality of all proprietary information disclosed to them. Other parties may not comply with the terms of their agreements with us, and we may not be able to enforce our rights adequately against these parties. We also rely on contractual rights to establish and protect our proprietary rights in our products.
We incorporate open source software into our products. Although we monitor our use of open source software closely, the terms of many open source licenses have not been interpreted by U.S. courts, and there is a risk that such licenses could be construed in a manner that could impose unanticipated conditions or restrictions on our ability to commercialize our products. In such event, we could be required to seek licenses from third parties in order to continue offering our products, to re-engineer our products or to discontinue the sale of our products in the event re-engineering cannot be accomplished on a timely basis, any of which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.
Environmental Matters
Our business and operations are subject to environmental laws in various jurisdictions around the world including the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment and Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment regulations adopted by the European Union. We seek to operate our business in compliance with such laws. We are currently subject to laws relating to the materials and content of our products and certain requirements relating to product take back and recycling. Environmental regulation is increasing, particularly outside of the United States, and we expect that our international operations will be subject to additional environmental compliance requirements, which may expose us to additional costs. To date, our compliance costs relating to environmental regulations have not resulted in a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.
Business Segment Data and Our Foreign Operations
We operate in the single industry segment of optical networking systems. Information concerning revenues, results of operations and revenues by geographic area is set forth in Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and in Note 15, “Segment Information,” of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, both of which are incorporated herein by reference. Information concerning identifiable assets is also set forth in Note 15, “Segment Information,” of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Information on risks attendant to our foreign operations is set forth below in Item 1A. “Risk Factors.”
10
Table of Contents
Executive Officers and Directors
Our executive officers and directors, and their ages and positions as of December 29, 2012, are set forth below:
| Name |
Age | Position | ||||
| Thomas J. Fallon |
51 | President, Chief Executive Officer and Director | ||||
| David F. Welch, Ph.D.(3) |
52 | Co-founder, Executive Vice President, Chief Strategy Officer and Director | ||||
| Ita M. Brennan |
45 | Chief Financial Officer | ||||
| Ronald D. Martin |
64 | Senior Vice President, Worldwide Sales (effective January 31, 2013, Mr. Martin was no longer employed by the Company) | ||||
| Michael O. McCarthy III |
47 | Chief Legal and Administrative Officer | ||||
| Kambiz Y. Hooshmand(3) |
51 | Chairman of the Board | ||||
| Kenneth A. Goldman(2)(4) |
63 | Director | ||||
| Philip J. Koen(3)(4) |
60 | Director | ||||
| Dan Maydan, Ph.D.(1)(2) |
77 | Director | ||||
| Paul J. Milbury(2)(4) |
64 | Director | ||||
| Carl Redfield(1)(2) |
65 | Director | ||||
| Mark A. Wegleitner(1)(3) |
62 | Director | ||||
| (1) | Member of Nominating and Governance Committee |
| (2) | Member of Compensation Committee |
| (3) | Member of Technology and Acquisition Committee |
| (4) | Member of Audit Committee |
Thomas J. Fallon has served as our President and Chief Executive Officer since January 2010 and as a member of our board of directors since July 2009. Mr. Fallon served as our Chief Operating Officer from October 2006 to December 2009 and as our Vice President of Engineering and Operations from April 2004 to September 2006. From August 2003 to March 2004, Mr. Fallon was Vice President, Corporate Quality and Development Operations of Cisco Systems, Inc., a networking and telecommunications company. From May 2001 to August 2003, Mr. Fallon served as Cisco’s General Manager of the Optical Transport Business Unit. Mr. Fallon is currently a member of the Engineering Advisory Board of the University of Texas at Austin. Mr. Fallon holds a B.S.M.E. and M.B.A. from the University of Texas at Austin.
David F. Welch, Ph.D. co-founded our company and has served as our Executive Vice President, Chief Strategy Officer since January 2004 and as a member of our board of directors since October 2010. Dr. Welch previously served as our Chief Development Officer/Chief Technology Officer from May 2001 to January 2005, as our Chief Marketing Officer from January 2005 to January 2009, as a member of our board of directors from May 2001 to November 2006. From February 2001 to April 2001, Dr. Welch served as Chief Technology Officer of the Transmission Products Group of JDS Uniphase Corporation, an optical component company. From January 1985 to February 2001, Dr. Welch served in various executive roles, including Chief Technology Officer and Vice President of Corporate Development of SDL Inc., an optical component company. Dr. Welch is the Founder and President of Students Matter, a non-profit organization focused on improving K-12 public education in California. Dr. Welch holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from the University of Delaware and a Ph.D. in Electrical Engineering from Cornell University. Dr. Welch holds over 130 patents, and has been awarded the Adolph Lomb Medal, Joseph Fraunhofer Award and the John Tyndall Award in recognition of his technical contributions to the optical industry. He is a Fellow of the Optical Society of America (OSA) and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
Ita M. Brennan has served as our Chief Financial Officer since July 2010. Prior to becoming our Chief Financial Officer, Ms. Brennan served as our Vice President of Finance and Corporate Controller since July 2006. From September 1997 to July 2006, Ms. Brennan held various roles at Maxtor Corporation, an information storage solutions company, including Vice President of Finance of Worldwide Operations. Ms. Brennan is a chartered accountant and public accounting alumna of Deloitte and Touche, having worked at the firm in Ireland and the U.S.
Ronald D. Martin served as our Senior Vice President of Worldwide Sales from August 2009 to January 2013. From November 2007 to June 2009, Mr. Martin served as Chief Marketing and Strategy Officer and
11
Table of Contents
President of ADVA Optical Networking’s North American subsidiary, an optical networking company. From May 2001 to November 2007, Mr. Martin served as Vice President and General Manager of the optical business unit of Cisco Systems, Inc., a networking and telecommunications company. From May 1987 to May 2001, Mr. Martin served as Chief Operating Officer at Fujitsu Network Communications, a networking and telecommunications company. Mr. Martin holds an A.A. from Iowa Lakes College.
Michael O. McCarthy III has served as our Chief Legal and Administrative Officer since March 2010. From January 2008 to March 2010, Mr. McCarthy served as our Chief Legal Officer. From May 2003 to January 2008, Mr. McCarthy served as our Vice President and General Counsel. Prior to joining our Company, Mr. McCarthy served in various executive roles, including Senior Vice President of Worldwide Sales and Support and Senior Vice President and General Counsel, at Ciena Corporation, a communications equipment company. Prior to working at Ciena, Mr. McCarthy worked in the legal department at MCI Communications Corporation and practiced law at the law firms of Hogan and Lovells and Baker & Mckenzie where he concentrated his practice in the areas of technology law and corporate and securities law. Mr. McCarthy holds a B.A. in Mathematical Economics from Colgate University and a J.D. from Vanderbilt University’s School of Law.
Kambiz Y. Hooshmand has been a member of our board of directors since December 2009 and has served as Chairman of our board of directors since October 2010. From March 2005 to May 2009, Mr. Hooshmand served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Applied Micro Circuits Corporation, a communications solutions company. From March 2000 to February 2002, Mr. Hooshmand served as Vice President and Division General Manager of the DSL Business Unit of Cisco. From February 2002 to March 2005, Mr. Hooshmand also served as Group Vice President and General Manager of Cisco. From June 1997 to February 2000, Mr. Hooshmand served as Cisco’s Vice President of Engineering. From January 1992 to June 1997, Mr. Hooshmand served as Director of Engineering of StrataCom,Inc., a networking solutions company. Mr. Hooshmand holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from California State University, Chico and an M.S. in Engineering from Stanford University.
Kenneth A. Goldman has been a member of our board of directors since February 2005. Mr. Goldman is Chief Financial Officer of Yahoo!, responsible for Yahoo!’s global finance functions including financial planning and analysis, controllership, tax, treasury, and investor relations since October 2012. Mr. Goldman served as Senior Vice President, Finance and Administration, and Chief Financial Officer of Fortinet Inc., a provider of unified threat management solutions, from September 2007 to September 2012. From November 2006 to August 2007, Mr. Goldman served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Dexterra, Inc. From August 2000 until March 2006, Mr. Goldman served as Senior Vice President, Finance and Administration, and Chief Financial Officer of Siebel Systems, Inc., a supplier of customer software solutions and services. From December 1999 to December 2003, Mr. Goldman served as an advisory council member of the Financial Accounting Standards Board Advisory Council. Mr. Goldman serves on the board of directors of NXP Semiconductor N.V., a mixed signal and standards product semiconductor company. Mr. Goldman is currently on the board of trustees of Cornell University and was formerly a member of the Treasury Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession, a public committee that made recommendations in September 2008 to encourage a more sustainable auditing profession. Mr. Goldman holds a B.S. in Electrical Engineering from Cornell University and an M.B.A. from the Harvard Business School.
Philip J. Koen has been a member of our board of directors since February 2010. Mr. Koen has been Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of Intermedia.net, Inc., a cloud-based provider of hosted Microsoft Exchange, collaboration and content management services since June 2011. Since October 2010, Mr. Koen has served as a member of the board of directors for Proofpoint, a cloud-based email security company. From February 2010 to May 2011, Mr. Koen served as the Chief Executive Officer of Montero Partners, an advisory services company. From March 2006 to January 2010, Mr. Koen served as Chief Executive Officer and Director of SAVVIS, Inc., a cloud infrastructure and hosted IT solutions provider. From July 1999 until February 2006, Mr. Koen was employed by Equinix, Inc., a provider of network neutral data centers and Internet exchange services, as President and Chief Operating Officer and as Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Koen is currently on the board of trustees of Webster University. Mr. Koen holds a B.A. in Economics from Claremont McKenna College and an M.B.A. from the University of Virginia.
Dan Maydan, Ph.D. has been a member of our board of directors since September 2001. From December 1993 to April 2003, Dr. Maydan served as President of Applied Materials Inc., a semiconductor equipment manufacturing company, and was appointed President Emeritus of Applied Materials from April 2003 to December
12
Table of Contents
2012. Dr. Maydan was a member of the board of directors of Applied Materials from June 1992 until March 2006. Since 1996, Dr. Maydan has served on the board of directors of Electronics for Imaging, Inc., a digital imaging and print management solutions company. Dr. Maydan holds a B.S. and M.S. in Electrical Engineering from the Israel Institute of Technology and a Ph.D. in Physics from Edinburgh University of Scotland.
Paul J. Milbury has been a member of our board of directors since July 2010. Mr. Milbury served as Vice President of Operations and Chief Financial Officer of Starent Networks Corp., a provider of mobile network solutions, from January 2007 until its acquisition by Cisco in 2009. From December 2009 to July 2010, he played a key role in integrating Starent Networks into Cisco to create the Mobile Internet Technology Group. From December 2000 to March 2007, Mr. Milbury served as Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Avid Technology, Inc., a digital media creation, management, and distribution solutions company. Mr. Milbury serves on the board of directors of Aerohive Networks, a wireless networking company in Sunnyvale, CA and Accedian Networks, a network performance assurance solutions provider in Montreal, Canada. Mr. Milbury holds a B.B.A. in Business and Economics and an M.B.A. from the University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Carl Redfield has been a member of our board of directors since August 2006. From September 2004 to his retirement in May 2008, Mr. Redfield served as Senior Vice President, New England Development Center Executive Sponsor, of Cisco. From February 1997 through September 2004, Mr. Redfield served as Cisco’s Senior Vice President, Manufacturing and Logistics. Mr. Redfield holds a B.S. in Materials Engineering from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and has completed post-graduate studies at the Harvard Business School.
Mark A. Wegleitner has been a member of our board of directors since May 2011. From April 2011, Mr. Wegleitner has served as President of Wegleitner Consulting, LLC, a privately owned telecommunications consulting company. From September 2007 until his retirement in July 2010, Mr. Wegleitner served as the Senior Vice President, Technology, for Verizon Communications Inc., a telecommunications company, where his responsibilities included technology assessment, network architecture, platform development and laboratory testing for wireline and wireless communications networks. From July 2000 to September 2007, he served as Chief Technology Officer for Verizon, with responsibility for wireline communications technologies. Prior to the creation of Verizon, Mr. Wegleitner held various positions in the Network Services division of Bell Atlantic, a telecommunications company, including Chief Technology Officer from January 1999 to July 2000. Prior to joining Bell Atlantic, he worked at Bell Laboratories and AT&T General Departments. Mr. Wegleitner holds a B.A. in Mathematics from St. John’s University and an M.S. in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from the University of California at Berkeley.
Our board of directors is currently composed of nine members. Messrs. Goldman, Hooshmand, Koen, Milbury, Redfield and Wegleitner and Dr. Maydan qualify as independent directors in accordance with the listing requirements of the NASDAQ Global Select Market (“NASDAQ”). The NASDAQ definition of independence includes a series of objective tests, such as that the director is not, and has not been for at least three years, one of our employees and that neither the director, nor any of his family members, has engaged in various types of business dealings with us. In addition, as further required by the NASDAQ rules, our board of directors has made a subjective determination as to each independent director that no relationships exist that, in the opinion of our board of directors, would interfere with his exercise of independent judgment in carrying out the responsibilities of a director. In making these determinations, our directors reviewed and discussed information provided by the directors and us with regard to each director’s business and personal activities as they may relate to us and our management.
Available Information
Our website address is http://www.infinera.com. Information contained on our website is not incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K unless expressly noted. We file reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), which we make available on our website free of charge. These reports include Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to such reports, each of which is provided on our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such materials with or furnish them to the SEC. You can also read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, DC 20549. You can obtain additional information about the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. In addition, the SEC maintains a website (http://www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC, including us.
13
Table of Contents
| ITEM 1A. | RISK FACTORS |
Investing in our securities involves a high degree of risk. Set forth below and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and in other documents we file with the SEC, are risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from the results contemplated by the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Because of the following factors, as well as other variables affecting our operating results, past financial performance should not be considered as a reliable indicator of future performance and investors should not use historical trends to anticipate results or trends in future periods.
We have a history of significant operating losses and may not achieve profitability on an annual basis in the future.
For the fiscal years ended December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, we recorded a net loss of $85.3 million and $81.7 million, respectively. As of December 29, 2012, our accumulated deficit was $572.4 million. We expect to continue to make significant expenditures related to the continued development of our business. These expenditures may include the addition of personnel related to the sales, marketing and research and development of our products and other costs related to the maintenance and expansion of our manufacturing facilities and research and development operations. We may therefore sustain significant operating losses and negative cash flows in the future. We will have to maintain significant increased revenue and product gross margins to achieve profitability on an annual basis.
Our revenue and operating results may fluctuate significantly, which could make our future results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below investor or analyst expectations.
Our revenue and operating results may fluctuate due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control. Over the past four fiscal quarters, our revenue has ranged from $93.5 million to $128.1 million and our operating loss has ranged from $15.5 million to $29.4 million. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Our budgeted expense levels are based, in large part, on our expectations of long-term future revenue and the development efforts associated with these future revenues. As a result, fluctuations in our revenue and gross margins will have a significant impact on our operating results. Given the relatively fixed nature of our operating costs including those relating to our personnel and facilities, particularly for our engineering personnel, any substantial adjustment to our expenses to account for lower levels of revenue will be difficult and may take time. Consequently, if our revenue does not meet projected levels in the short-term, our inventory levels and operating expenses would be high relative to revenue, resulting in additional operating losses.
In addition to other risks discussed in this section, factors that may contribute to fluctuations in our revenue and our operating results include:
| • | fluctuations in demand, sales cycles and prices for products and services, including discounts given in response to competitive pricing pressures; |
| • | fluctuations in our product mix, including the mix of higher and lower margin products and significant mix changes resulting from new customer deployments; |
| • | changes in customers’ budgets for optical communications network equipment purchases and changes in their purchasing cycles; |
| • | order cancellations or reductions or delays in delivery schedules by our customers; |
| • | timeliness of our customers’ payments for their purchases; |
| • | our ability to control costs, including our operating expenses and the costs of components we purchase for our products; |
| • | readiness of customer sites for installation of our products; |
| • | the timing of product releases or upgrades by us or by our competitors. In particular, if we fail to achieve targeted release dates for our future products, or convert lab trials and field evaluations by potential customers into purchase orders, our revenue and operating results may be negatively impacted; |
14
Table of Contents
| • | any significant changes in the competitive dynamics of our market, including any new entrants, technological advances or substantial discounting of products; |
| • | availability of third-party suppliers to provide contract engineering and installation services for us; |
| • | the timing of recognizing revenue in any given quarter, including the impact of revenue recognition standards and any future changes in U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) or new interpretations of existing accounting rules; and |
| • | general economic conditions in domestic and international markets. |
Many factors affecting our results of operations are beyond our control and make it difficult to predict our results for a particular quarter or to accurately predict future revenues beyond a one-quarter time horizon. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts or below any guidance we may in the future provide to the market, the price of our common stock may decline substantially.
Our gross margins may fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter and may be adversely affected by a number of factors, some of which are beyond our control.
Our gross margins fluctuate from period-to-period and vary by customer and by product specification. Over the past four fiscal quarters, our gross margins have ranged from 34% to 39%. Our gross margins are likely to continue to fluctuate and will be affected by a number of factors, including:
| • | the mix in any period of the customers purchasing our products and the product mix, including the relative mix of higher and lower margin products and services; |
| • | significant new customer deployments, often with a higher portion of lower or negative margin common equipment; |
| • | price discounts negotiated by our customers; |
| • | introduction of new products, such as the DTN-X platform, with initial sales at relatively small volumes and higher product costs; |
| • | sales volume from each customer during the period; |
| • | the amount of equipment we sell or expect to sell for a loss in any given quarter; |
| • | increased price competition, including competition from low-cost producers from China; |
| • | charges for excess or obsolete inventory; |
| • | changes in the price or availability of components for our products; |
| • | changes in our manufacturing costs, including fluctuations in yields and production volumes; and |
| • | increased warranty or repair costs. |
It is likely that the average unit prices of our products will decrease over time in response to competitive pricing pressures, increased negotiated sales discounts, new product introductions by us or our competitors or other factors. In addition, some of our customer contracts contain annual technology discounts that require us to decrease the sales price of our products to these customers. In response, we will need to reduce the cost of our products through manufacturing efficiencies, design improvements and cost reductions. If these efforts are not successful or if we are unable to reduce our costs to a greater extent than the reduction in the price of our products, our revenue and gross margin will decline, causing our operating results to decline. Fluctuations in gross margin may make it difficult to manage our business and achieve or maintain profitability.
Aggressive business tactics by our competitors may harm our business.
The markets in which we compete are extremely competitive and have resulted in aggressive business tactics by our competitors, including:
| • | aggressively pricing their products, including offering significant one-time discounts and guaranteed future price decreases; |
15
Table of Contents
| • | providing financing, marketing and advertising assistance to customers; |
| • | announcing competing products prior to market availability combined with extensive marketing efforts; |
| • | influencing customer requirements to emphasize different product capabilities, such as greater minimum bandwidth requirements or higher transport speeds; |
| • | offering to repurchase our equipment from existing customers; and |
| • | asserting intellectual property rights. |
The level of competition and pricing pressure tend to increase during periods of economic weakness or during periods when there are fewer network build-out projects. If we fail to compete successfully against our current and future competitors, or if our current or future competitors continue or expand aggressive business tactics, including those described above, demand for our products could decline, we could experience delays or cancellations of customer orders, or we could be required to reduce our prices or increase our expenses.
Our ability to increase our revenue will depend upon continued growth of demand by consumers and businesses for additional network capacity.
Our future success depends on factors that increase the amount of data transmitted over communications networks and the growth of optical communications networks to meet the increased demand for optical capacity. These factors include the growth of mobility, video, cloud-based services, increased broadband connectivity and the continuing adoption of high-capacity, revenue-generating services. If demand for such bandwidth does not continue, or slows down, the need for increased bandwidth across networks and the market for optical communications network products may not continue to grow and our product sales would be negatively impacted. In addition, if general economic conditions weaken, our customers and potential customers may slow or delay their purchase decisions, which would have an adverse effect on our business and financial condition.
Any delays in the development and introduction of our products, and any future delays in releasing new products or in releasing enhancements to our existing products may harm our business.
Because our products are based on complex technology, including, in some cases, the development of next-generation PICs and specialized ASICs, we may experience unanticipated delays in developing, improving, manufacturing or deploying these products. The development process for our PICs is lengthy, and any modifications to our PICs, including the development of our next-generation PICs, entail significant development cost and risks.
At any given time, various new product introductions and enhancements to our existing products, such as future products based on our next-generation PICs, are in the development phase and are not yet ready for commercial manufacturing or deployment. We rely on third parties, some of which are relatively early stage companies, to develop and manufacture components for our next-generation products, which can require custom development. The maturing process from laboratory prototype to customer trials, and subsequently to general availability, involves a significant number of simultaneous development efforts. These efforts often must be completed in a timely manner so that they may be introduced into the product development cycle for our systems, and include:
| • | completion of product development, including the completion of any associated PIC development, such as our next-generation PICs, and the completion of associated module development, including modules developed by third parties; |
| • | the qualification and multiple sourcing of critical components; |
| • | validation of manufacturing methods and processes; |
| • | extensive quality assurance and reliability testing and staffing of testing infrastructure; |
| • | validation of software; and |
| • | establishment of systems integration and systems test validation requirements. |
Each of these steps, in turn, presents risks of failure, rework or delay, any one of which could decrease the speed and scope of product introduction and marketplace acceptance of our products. New generations of our
16
Table of Contents
PICs, specialized ASICs and intensive software testing are important to the timely introduction of new products and enhancements to our existing products, and are subject to these development risks. In addition, unexpected intellectual property disputes, failure of critical design elements, and a host of other development execution risks may delay, or even prevent, the introduction of new products or enhancements to our existing products. If we do not develop and successfully introduce or enhance products in a timely manner, our competitive position will suffer. In addition, if we do not develop and successfully introduce or enhance products in sufficient time so as to satisfy our customer’s expectations, we may lose future business from such customers and harm our reputation and our customer relationships, either of which would harm our business and operating results.
The introduction of our DTN-X platform may adversely impact the timing of our revenues, our results of operations and our margins.
We began shipping our new DTN-X platform in the second quarter of 2012 and recognized initial revenues for the DTN-X platform in the third quarter of 2012. As a relatively new product, we face increased “product introduction” risks including risks associated with customer qualification and evaluation of the DTN-X platform, delays in the development or manufacturing of the DTN-X platform, reliability, quality or other defects, and delays in customer purchases. In addition, the DTN-X platform is subject to more significant cost variations and increased difficulty in predicting customer demand and effectively managing inventory levels so that they are in line with anticipated demand.
The introduction of the DTN-X platform, with similar, but enhanced functionality to the DTN platform, increases the risk that customers may forego purchases of the DTN platform in favor of the DTN-X platform. Accordingly, a portion of our DTN platform revenues will be impacted by this new product as some of our customers and prospects will choose to purchase the DTN-X platform in place of the DTN platform. In addition, the introduction of the DTN-X platform may put pressure on the price of our existing DTN platform. Because the DTN-X platform is a new product for which customers may require additional testing requirements prior to acceptance, initial revenue recognition for the DTN-X platform may take longer than for sales of the DTN platform. Any delay in our ability to convert lab trials and field evaluations by potential customers into purchase orders, or in our ability to recognize revenue from the DTN-X may adversely impact our quarterly revenue results. In addition, if we are required to write off or write down a significant amount of inventory, our results of operations for the period would be adversely affected.
We may be required to recognize costs and expenses for our DTN-X platform before we can recognize the related revenue. Accordingly, until we can ramp up the manufacture of our DTN-X platform, our margins related to the initial sales of the DTN-X platform will be negatively impacted. Such uncertainty related to the introduction and market acceptance of our DTN-X platform could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects.
The markets in which we compete are highly competitive and dominated by large corporations, and we may not be able to compete effectively.
Competition in the optical networking equipment market is intense, and we expect such competition to increase. A number of very large companies have historically dominated the optical communications network equipment industry. Our competitors include current wavelength division multiplexing suppliers, such as Alcatel-Lucent, Ciena Corporation, Cisco Systems, Ericsson, Fujitsu Limited, Huawei Technologies Co., NEC Corporation, Tellabs and ZTE Corporation. Competition in these markets is based on price, commercial terms, functionality, manufacturing capability, pre-existing installations, services, existing business and customer relationships, scalability and the ability of products and breadth and quality of services to meet our customers’ immediate and future network requirements. Other companies have, or may in the future develop, products that are or could be competitive with our products. In particular, if a competitor develops a photonic integrated circuit with similar functionality to our PICs, our business could be harmed. Recent mergers from our competitors and any future acquisitions or combinations between or among our competitors may adversely affect our competitive position by strengthening our competitors.
Many of our competitors have substantially greater name recognition and technical, financial and marketing resources, greater manufacturing capacity and better established relationships with incumbent carriers and other potential customers than we have. Many of our competitors have more resources to develop or acquire, and more experience in developing or acquiring, new products and technologies and in creating market awareness for those
17
Table of Contents
products and technologies. In addition, many of our competitors have the financial resources to offer competitive products at aggressive pricing levels that could prevent us from competing effectively. Further, many of our competitors have built long-standing relationships with some of our prospective customers and have the ability to provide financing to customers and could, therefore, have an inherent advantage in selling products to those customers.
We compete with low-cost producers from China that can increase pricing pressure on us and a number of smaller companies that provide competition for a specific product, customer segment or geographic market. These competitors often base their products on the latest available technologies. Due to the narrower focus of their efforts, these competitors may achieve commercial availability of their products more quickly than we can and may provide attractive alternatives to our customers.
Our large customers have substantial negotiating leverage, which may require that we agree to terms and conditions that result in increased cost of sales, decreased revenue and lower average selling prices and gross margins, all of which would harm our operating results.
Substantial changes in the optical networking industry have occurred over the last few years. Many potential customers have confronted static or declining revenue. Many of our customers have substantial debt burdens, many have experienced financial distress, and some have gone out of business, been acquired by other service providers, or announced their withdrawal from segments of the business. Consolidation in the markets in which we compete has resulted in changes in the structure of the communications networking industry, with greater concentration of purchasing power in a small number of large service providers, cable operators, internet content providers and government agencies. The increased concentration among our customer base may also lead to increased competition for new network deployments and increased negotiating power for our customers. This may require us to decrease our average selling prices which would have an adverse impact on our operating results.
Further, many of our customers are large communications service providers that have substantial purchasing power and leverage in negotiating contractual arrangements with us. Our customers have and may continue to seek advantageous pricing, payment and other commercial terms and may require us to develop additional features in the products we sell to them. If we are required to develop additional features for our product for a customer, we may be required to defer some of our revenue for such a customer until we have developed and delivered such additional features. We have and may continue to be required to agree to unfavorable commercial terms with these customers, including reducing the average selling price of our products or agreeing to extended payment terms in response to these commercial requirements or competitive pricing pressures. To maintain acceptable operating results, we will need to comply with these commercial terms, develop and introduce new products and product enhancements on a timely basis and continue to reduce our costs.
We expect the factors described above to continue to affect our business and operating results for an indeterminate period, in several ways, including:
| • | overall capital expenditures by many of our customers or potential customers may be flat or reduced; |
| • | we will continue to have only limited ability to forecast the volume and product mix of our sales; |
| • | managing expenditures and inventory will be difficult in light of the uncertainties surrounding our business; and |
| • | increased competition will enable customers to insist on more favorable terms and conditions for sales, including product discounts, extended payment terms or financing assistance, as a condition of procuring their business. |
If we are unable to offset any reductions in our average selling prices with increased sales volumes and reduced production costs, or if we fail to develop and introduce new products and enhancements on a timely basis, or if we disagree on our interpretation and compliance with the commercial terms of our customer agreements, our relationships with our customers and our operating results would be harmed.
We must respond to rapid technological change and comply with evolving industry standards and requirements for our products to be successful.
The optical networking equipment market is characterized by rapid technological change, changes in customer requirements and evolving industry standards. We continually invest in research and development to
18
Table of Contents
sustain or enhance our existing products, but the introduction of new communications technologies and the emergence of new industry standards or requirements could render our products obsolete. Further, in developing our products, we have made, and will continue to make, assumptions with respect to which standards or requirements will be adopted by our customers and competitors. If the standards or requirements adopted by our prospective customers are different from those on which we have focused our efforts, market acceptance of our products would be reduced or delayed and our business would be harmed.
We are continuing to invest a significant portion of our research and development efforts in the development of our next-generation products. We expect our competitors to continue to improve the performance of their existing products and to introduce new products and technologies and to influence customers’ buying criteria so as to emphasize product capabilities that we do not, or may not, possess. To be competitive, we must properly anticipate future customer requirements and we must continue to invest significant resources in research and development, sales and marketing and customer support. If we do not anticipate these future customer requirements and invest in the technologies necessary to enable us to have and to sell the appropriate solutions, it may limit our competitive position and future sales, which would have an adverse effect on our business and financial condition. We may not have sufficient resources to make these investments and we may not be able to make the technological advances necessary to be competitive.
We are dependent on sole source and limited source suppliers for several key components, and if we fail to obtain these components on a timely basis, we will not meet our customers’ product delivery requirements.
We currently purchase several key components for our products from single or limited sources. In particular, we rely on our own production of certain components of our products, such as PICs, and on third parties as sole source suppliers for certain of the components of our products, including ASICs, field-programmable gate arrays, processors, and other semiconductor and optical components. We purchase these items on a purchase order basis and have no long-term contracts with many of these sole source suppliers. We have increased our reliance on third parties to develop and manufacture components for certain products (40 Gbps and 100 Gbps), some of which require custom development. For example, for the 40 Gbps application of our DTN platform, we purchase customized discrete components. If any of our sole or limited source suppliers suffer from capacity constraints, lower than expected yields, deployment delays, work stoppages or any other reduction or disruption in output, they may be unable to meet our delivery schedule which could result in lost revenue, additional product costs and deployment delays that could harm our business and customer relationships. Further, our suppliers could enter into exclusive arrangements with our competitors, refuse to sell their products or components to us at commercially reasonable prices or at all, go out of business or discontinue their relationships with us. We may be unable to develop alternative sources for these components.
The loss of a source of supply, or lack of sufficient availability of key components, could require us to redesign products that use such components, which could result in lost revenue, additional product costs and deployment delays that could harm our business and customer relationships. If we do not receive critical components for our products in a timely manner, we will be unable to deliver those components to our contract manufacturer in a timely manner and would, therefore, be unable to meet our prospective customers’ product delivery requirements. In addition, the sourcing from new suppliers may require us to re-design our products, which could cause delays in the manufacturing and delivery of our products. In the past, we have experienced delivery delays because of lack of availability of components or reliability issues with components that we were purchasing. In addition, some of our suppliers have gone out of business, limited their supply of components to us, or indicated that they may be going out of business. Historically, we have seen a tightening of supply with a number of our suppliers and we have experienced longer than normal lead times and supply delays. We may in the future experience a shortage of certain components as a result of our own manufacturing issues, manufacturing issues at our suppliers or contract manufacturers, capacity problem experiences by our suppliers or contract manufacturers, or strong demand in the industry for such components. A return to growth in the economy is likely to continue to create pressure on us and our suppliers to accurately project overall component demand and manufacturing capacity. These supplier disruptions may continue to occur in the future, which could limit our ability to produce our products and cause us to fail to meet a customer’s delivery requirements. Such events could harm our reputation and our customer relationships, either of which would harm our business and operating results.
19
Table of Contents
If we fail to accurately forecast demand for our products, we may have excess or insufficient inventory, which may increase our operating costs, decrease our revenue and harm our business.
We are required to generate forecasts of future demands for our products several months prior to the scheduled delivery to our prospective customers. This requires us to make significant investments before we know if corresponding revenue will be recognized. Lead times for materials and components, including ASICs, that we need to order for the manufacture of our products vary significantly and depend on factors such as the specific supplier, contract terms and demand for each component at a given time. In the past, we have experienced lengthening in lead times for certain components. If the lead times for components are lengthened, we may be required to purchase increased levels of such components to satisfy our delivery commitments to our customers.
If we overestimate demand for our products or particular elements of our products and increase our inventory in anticipation of customer orders that do not materialize, we will have excess inventory, we will face a risk of obsolescence and significant inventory write-downs and our fixed costs will be spread across fewer units, raising our per unit costs. If we underestimate demand for our products, we will have inadequate inventory, which could slow down or interrupt the manufacturing of our products and result in delays in shipments and our ability to recognize revenue. If actual market conditions are less favorable than our internal projections, additional inventory write-offs may be required. In addition, we may be unable to meet our supply commitments to customers, which could result in a loss of certain customer opportunities or a breach of our customer agreements that requires payment of damages for delay.
If our contract manufacturers do not perform as we expect, our business may be harmed.
We rely on third-party contract manufacturers to perform a significant portion of the manufacturing of our products, and our future success will depend on our ability to have sufficient volumes of our products manufactured in a cost-effective and quality-controlled manner. We have engaged third parties to manufacture certain elements of our products at multiple contract manufacturing sites located around the world but do not have long-term agreements in place with some of our manufacturers and suppliers. There are a number of risks associated with our dependence on contract manufacturers, including:
| • | reduced control over delivery schedules, particularly for international contract manufacturing sites; |
| • | reliance on the quality assurance procedures of third parties; |
| • | potential uncertainty regarding manufacturing yields and costs; |
| • | potential lack of adequate capacity during periods of high demand; |
| • | potential uncertainty related to the use of international contract manufacturing sites; |
| • | limited warranties on components supplied to us; |
| • | potential misappropriation of our intellectual property; and |
| • | potential manufacturing disruptions (including disruptions caused by geopolitical events, military actions or natural disasters). |
Any of these risks could impair our ability to fulfill orders. Our contract manufacturers may not be able to meet the delivery requirements of our customers, which could decrease customer satisfaction and harm our product sales. We do not have long-term contracts or arrangements with our contract manufacturers that will guarantee product availability, or the continuation of particular pricing or payment terms. If our contract manufacturers are unable or unwilling to continue manufacturing our products or components of our products in required volumes or our relationship with any of our contract manufacturers is discontinued for any reason, we would be required to identify and qualify alternative manufacturers, which could cause us to be unable to meet our supply requirements to our customers and result in the breach of our customer agreements. Qualifying a new contract manufacturer and commencing volume production is expensive and time-consuming and if we are required to change or qualify a new contract manufacturer, we would likely lose sales revenue and damage our existing customer relationships.
20
Table of Contents
We are dependent on a small number of key customers for a significant portion of our revenue and the loss of, or a significant reduction in, orders from one or more of our key customers would reduce our revenue and harm our operating results.
A relatively small number of customers account for a large percentage of our revenue. As a result, our business will be harmed if any of our key customers do not generate as much revenue as we forecast, stop purchasing from us, or substantially reduce their orders to us. In addition, our business will be harmed if we fail to maintain our competitive advantage with our key customers.
Our ability to continue to generate revenue from our key customers will depend on our ability to maintain strong relationships with these customers and introduce new products that are desirable to these customers at competitive prices, and we may not be successful at doing so. In most cases, our sales are made to these customers pursuant to standard purchase agreements rather than long-term purchase commitments, and orders may be cancelled or reduced readily. In the event of a cancellation or reduction of an order, we may not have enough time to reduce operating expenses to minimize the effect of the lost revenue on our business. Our operating results will continue to depend on our ability to sell our products to our key customers.
If we fail to expand sales of our products into international markets or to sell our products to new types of customers, such as U.S. regional Bell operating companies and international postal, telephone and telegraph companies, our revenue will be harmed.
We believe that, in order to grow our revenue and business and to build a large and diverse customer base, we must successfully sell our products in international markets and to new types of customers, such as U.S. regional Bell operating companies and international postal, telephone and telegraph companies. We have limited experience selling our products internationally and to U.S. regional Bell operating companies and international postal, telephone and telegraph companies. Sales cycles for these customers are often very lengthy and competition for these customers is intense. To succeed in these sales efforts, we believe we must hire additional sales personnel to develop our relationships with these potential customers and develop and manage new sales channels through resellers, distributors and systems integrators. If we do not succeed in our efforts to sell to these customers, the size of our total addressable market will be limited. This, in turn, would harm our ability to grow our customer base and revenue.
If we fail to protect our intellectual property rights, our competitive position could be harmed or we could incur significant expense to enforce our rights.
We depend on our ability to protect our proprietary technology. We rely on a combination of methods to protect our intellectual property, including limiting access to certain information, and utilizing trade secret, patent, copyright and trademark laws and confidentiality agreements with employees and third parties, all of which offer only limited protection. The steps we have taken to protect our proprietary rights may be inadequate to preclude misappropriation or unauthorized disclosure of our proprietary information or infringement of our intellectual property rights, and our ability to police such misappropriation, unauthorized disclosure or infringement is uncertain, particularly in countries outside of the United States. This is likely to become an increasingly important issue as we expand our operations and product development into countries that provide a lower level of intellectual property protection. We do not know whether any of our pending patent applications will result in the issuance of patents or whether the examination process will require us to narrow our claims, and even if patents are issued, they may be contested, circumvented or invalidated. Moreover, the rights granted under any issued patents may not provide us with a competitive advantage, and, as with any technology, competitors may be able to develop similar or superior technologies to our own now or in the future.
Protecting against the unauthorized use of our products, trademarks and other proprietary rights is expensive, difficult, time consuming and, in some cases, impossible. Litigation may be necessary in the future to enforce or defend our intellectual property rights, to protect our trade secrets or to determine the validity or scope of the proprietary rights of others. Such litigation could result in substantial cost and diversion of management resources, either of which could harm our business, financial condition and operating results. Furthermore, many of our current and potential competitors have the ability to dedicate substantially greater resources to enforce their intellectual property rights than we do. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing upon or misappropriating our intellectual property.
21
Table of Contents
Claims by others that we infringe their intellectual property could harm our business.
Our industry is characterized by the existence of a large number of patents and frequent claims and related litigation regarding patent and other intellectual property rights. In particular, many leading companies in the optical networking industry, including our competitors, have extensive patent portfolios with respect to optical networking technology. We expect that infringement claims may increase as the number of products and competitors in our market increases and overlaps occur. From time to time, third parties may assert exclusive patent, copyright, trademark and other intellectual property rights to technologies and related standards that are important to our business or seek to invalidate the proprietary rights that we hold. Competitors or other third parties have, and may continue to assert claims or initiate litigation or other proceedings against us or our manufacturers, suppliers or customers alleging infringement of their proprietary rights, or seeking to invalidate our proprietary rights, with respect to our products and technology. In the event that we are unsuccessful in defending against any such claims, or any resulting lawsuit or proceedings, we could incur liability for damages and/or have valuable proprietary rights invalidated.
Any claim of infringement from a third party, even one without merit, could cause us to incur substantial costs defending against the claim, and could distract our management from running our business. Furthermore, a party making such a claim, if successful, could secure a judgment that requires us to pay substantial damages. A judgment could also include an injunction or other court order that could prevent us from offering our products. In addition, we might be required to seek a license for the use of such intellectual property, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Alternatively, we may be required to develop non-infringing technology, which would require significant effort and expense and may ultimately not be successful. Any of these events could harm our business, financial condition and operating results. Competitors and other third parties have and may continue to assert infringement claims against our customers and sales partners. Any of these claims would require us to initiate or defend potentially protracted and costly litigation on their behalf, regardless of the merits of these claims, because we generally indemnify our customers and sales partners from claims of infringement of proprietary rights of third parties. If any of these claims succeed, we may be forced to pay damages on behalf of our customers or sales partners, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.
We incorporate open source software into our products. Although we monitor our use of open source software closely, the terms of many open source licenses have not been interpreted by U.S. courts, and there is a risk that such licenses could be construed in a manner that could impose unanticipated conditions or restrictions on our ability to commercialize our products. In such event, we could be required to seek licenses from third parties in order to continue offering our products, to re-engineer our products or to discontinue the sale of our products in the event re-engineering cannot be accomplished on a timely basis, any of which could adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition.
We are currently involved in litigation with Cheetah and Level 3 whereby Cheetah alleges that we and Level 3 infringe on two Cheetah patents. In addition, Cambrian has filed suit against us and seven of our customers alleging that the use of our DTN platform by our customers infringes upon a Cambrian patent. Information regarding these matters is set forth in Item 3. “Legal Proceedings” and is incorporated herein by reference. We believe these lawsuits are without merit and intend to defend ourselves vigorously, but are unable to predict the likelihood of an unfavorable outcome. We may enter into settlements or be subject to judgments that may, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or operating results. Litigation can be expensive, lengthy and disruptive to normal business operations. Moreover, the results of litigation are inherently uncertain and may result in adverse rulings or decisions. In the event that Cheetah or Cambrian is successful in obtaining a judgment requiring us to pay damages, obtaining a judgment requiring us to indemnify our customers for damages imposed upon them, or obtaining an injunction preventing the sale of our products, our business and operating results could be harmed.
Our manufacturing process is very complex and the partial or complete loss of our manufacturing facility, or a reduction in yields or an inability to scale capacity to meet customer demands could harm our business.
The manufacturing process for certain components of our products, including our PICs, is technically challenging. In the event that any of these manufacturing facilities were fully or partially destroyed, as a result of fire, water damage, or otherwise, it would limit our ability to produce our products. Because of the complex nature of our
22
Table of Contents
manufacturing facilities, such loss would take a considerable amount of time to repair or rebuild. The partial or complete loss of any of our manufacturing facilities, or an event causing the interruption in our use of such facility for any extended period of time would cause our business, financial condition and operating results to be harmed.
Minor deviations in the PIC manufacturing process can cause substantial decreases in yields and, in some cases, cause production to be suspended. In the past, we have had significant variances in our PIC yields, including production interruptions and suspensions and may have continued yield variances, including additional interruptions or suspensions in the future. We expect our manufacturing yield for our next-generation PICs to be lower initially and increase as we achieve full production. Poor yields from our PIC manufacturing process or defects, integration issues or other performance problems in our products could limit our ability to satisfy customer demand requirements, and could cause us customer relations and business reputation problems, harming our business and operating results.
Our inability to obtain sufficient manufacturing capacity to meet demand, either in our own facilities or through foundry or similar arrangements with third parties, could harm our relationships with customers, our business and our operating results.
Upgrades to our internal business processes and systems, and problems with the design or implementation of these systems and processes, could interfere with, and therefore harm, our business, operations and ability to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting.
We implemented an enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) system during the third quarter of 2012, which resulted in a change to our system of internal control over financial reporting. Any disruptions or delays as a result of the implementation of the ERP system or processes, particularly any disruptions or delays that impact our operations, could adversely affect our ability to run our business. If the implementation adversely affects our ability to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting, our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be negatively impacted.
Unfavorable macroeconomic and market conditions may adversely affect our industry, business and gross margins.
Our business depends on the overall demand for additional bandwidth capacity and on the economic health and willingness of our customers and potential customers to make capital commitments to purchase our products and services. As a result of macroeconomic or market uncertainty, we may face new risks that we have not yet identified. In addition, a number of the risks associated with our business, which are disclosed in these risk factors, may increase in likelihood, magnitude or duration.
In the past, unfavorable macroeconomic and market conditions have resulted in sustained periods of decreased demand for optical communications products. These conditions may also result in the tightening of credit markets, which may limit or delay our customers’ ability to obtain necessary financing for their purchases of our products. A lack of liquidity in the capital markets or the continued uncertainty in the global economic environment may cause our customers to delay or cancel their purchases, increase the time they take to pay or default on their payment obligations, each of which would negatively affect our business and operating results. Continued weakness and uncertainty in the global economy could cause some of our customers to become illiquid, delay payments or adversely affect our collection of their accounts, which could result in a higher level of bad debt expense. In addition, currency fluctuations could negatively affect our international customers’ ability or desire to purchase our products.
Challenging economic conditions have from time to time contributed to slowdowns in the telecommunications industry in which we operate. Such slowdowns may result in:
| • | reduced demand for our products as a result of constraints on capital spending by our customers, particularly service providers; |
| • | increased price competition for our products, not only from our competitors, but also as a result of our customer’s or potential customer’s utilization of inventoried or underutilized products, which could put additional downward pressure on our near term gross profits; |
| • | risk of excess or obsolete inventories; |
23
Table of Contents
| • | excess manufacturing capacity and higher associated overhead costs as a percentage of revenue; and |
| • | more limited ability to accurately forecast our business and future financial performance. |
A lack of liquidity and economic uncertainty may adversely affect our suppliers or the terms on which we purchase products from these suppliers. It may also cause some of our suppliers to become illiquid. Any of these impacts could limit our ability to obtain components for our products from these suppliers and could adversely impact our supply chain or the delivery schedule to our customers. This also could require us to purchase more expensive components, or re-design our products, which could cause increases in the cost of our products and delays in the manufacturing and delivery of our products. Such events could harm our gross margins and harm our reputation and our customer relationships, either of which could harm our business and operating results.
Product performance problems, including undetected errors in our hardware or software, or deployment delays could harm our business and reputation.
The development and production of new products with high technology content is complicated and often involves problems with software, components and manufacturing methods. Complex hardware and software systems, such as our products, can often contain undetected errors when first introduced or as new versions are released. In addition, errors associated with components we purchase from third parties, including customized components, may be difficult to resolve. We have experienced errors in the past in connection with our DTN platform, including failures due to the receipt of faulty components from our suppliers. We suspect that errors, including potentially serious errors, will be found from time to time in our products. Our products may suffer degradation of performance and reliability over time.
If reliability, quality or network monitoring problems develop, a number of negative effects on our business could result, including:
| • | delays in our ability to recognize revenue; |
| • | costs associated with fixing software or hardware defects or replacing products; |
| • | high service and warranty expenses; |
| • | delays in shipments; |
| • | high inventory excess and obsolescence expense; |
| • | high levels of product returns; |
| • | diversion of our engineering personnel from our product development efforts; |
| • | delays in collecting accounts receivable; |
| • | payment of damages for performance failures; |
| • | reduced orders from existing customers; and |
| • | declining interest from potential customers. |
Because we outsource the manufacturing of certain components of our products, we may also be subject to product performance problems as a result of the acts or omissions of third parties.
From time to time, we encounter interruptions or delays in the activation of our products at a customer’s site. These interruptions or delays may result from product performance problems or from issues with installation and activation, some of which are outside our control. If we experience significant interruptions or delays that we cannot promptly resolve, the associated revenue for these installations may be delayed or confidence in our products could be undermined, which could cause us to lose customers and fail to add new customers.
If we lose key personnel or fail to attract and retain additional qualified personnel when needed, our business may be harmed.
Our success depends to a significant degree upon the continued contributions of our key management, engineering, sales and marketing, and finance personnel, many of whom would be difficult to replace. For
24
Table of Contents
example, senior members of our engineering team have unique technical experience that would be difficult to replace. We do not have long-term employment contracts or key person life insurance covering any of our key personnel. Because our products are complex, we must hire and retain a large number of highly trained customer service and support personnel to ensure that the deployment of our products do not result in network disruption for our customers. We believe our future success will depend in large part upon our ability to identify, attract and retain highly skilled managerial, engineering, sales, marketing, finance and customer service and support personnel. Competition for these individuals is intense in our industry, especially in the San Francisco Bay Area where we are headquartered. We may not succeed in identifying, attracting and retaining appropriate personnel. The loss of the services of any of our key personnel, the inability to identify, attract or retain qualified personnel in the future or delays in hiring qualified personnel, particularly engineers and sales personnel, could make it difficult for us to manage our business and meet key objectives, such as timely product introductions.
Our sales cycle can be long and unpredictable, which could result in an unexpected revenue shortfall in any given quarter.
Our products have a lengthy sales cycle, which can extend from six to twelve months and may take even longer for larger prospective customers such as U.S. regional Bell operating companies, international postal, telephone and telegraph companies and U.S. competitive local exchange carriers. Our prospective customers conduct significant evaluation, testing, implementation and acceptance procedures before they purchase our products. We incur substantial sales and marketing expenses and expend significant management effort during this time, regardless of whether we make a sale.
Because the purchase of our equipment involves substantial cost, most of our customers wait to purchase our equipment until they are ready to deploy it in their network. As a result, it is difficult for us to accurately predict the timing of future purchases by our customers. In addition, product purchases are often subject to budget constraints, multiple approvals and unplanned administrative processing and other delays. If sales expected from customers for a particular quarter are not realized in that quarter or at all, our revenue will be negatively impacted.
Our international sales and operations subject us to additional risks that may harm our operating results.
We market, sell and service our products globally. In 2012, 2011 and 2010, we derived approximately 32%, 30% and 25%, respectively, of our revenue from customers outside of the United States. We have sales and support personnel in numerous countries worldwide. In addition, we have a large group of development personnel located in Bangalore, India; Beijing, China; and Kanata, Canada. We expect that significant management attention and financial resources will be required for our international activities over the foreseeable future as we continue to expand our international presence. In some countries, our successes in selling our products will depend in part on our ability to form relationships with local partners. Our inability to identify appropriate partners or reach mutually satisfactory arrangements for international sales of our products could impact our ability to maintain or increase international market demand for our products.
Our international operations are subject to inherent risks, and our future results could be adversely affected by a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control, including:
| • | greater difficulty in collecting accounts receivable and longer collection periods; |
| • | difficulties of managing and staffing international offices, and the increased travel, infrastructure and legal compliance costs associated with multiple international locations; |
| • | the impact of recessions in economies outside the United States; |
| • | tariff and trade barriers and other regulatory requirements or contractual limitations on our ability to sell or develop our products in certain foreign markets; |
| • | certification requirements; |
| • | greater difficulty documenting and testing our internal controls; |
| • | reduced protection for intellectual property rights in some countries; |
| • | potentially adverse tax consequences; |
25
Table of Contents
| • | political and economic instability; |
| • | effects of changes in currency exchange rates which could negatively affect our financial results and cash flows; and |
| • | service provider and government spending patterns. |
International customers may also require that we comply with certain testing or customization of our products to conform to local standards. The product development costs to test or customize our products could be extensive and a material expense for us.
As we continue to expand our business globally, our success will depend, in large part, on our ability to anticipate and effectively manage these and other risks associated with our international operations. Our failure to manage any of these risks could harm our international operations and reduce our international sales.
We may be adversely affected by fluctuations in currency exchange rates.
A portion of our sales are to countries outside of the United States, and are in currencies other than U.S. dollars, particularly the Euro. Accordingly, fluctuations in foreign currency rates, most notably the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against the Euro, could have a material impact on our revenue in future periods. We enter into foreign currency exchange forward contracts to reduce the impact of foreign currency fluctuations on accounts receivable denominated in Euro. These hedging programs reduce the impact of currency exchange rate movements on certain transactions, but do not cover all foreign-denominated transactions and therefore do not entirely eliminate the impact of fluctuations in exchange rates which could negatively affect our results of operations and financial condition.
If we fail to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting in the future, the accuracy and timing of our financial reporting may be adversely affected.
We are required to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The provisions of the act require, among other things, that we maintain effective internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. Preparing our financial statements involves a number of complex processes, many of which are done manually and are dependent upon individual data input or review. These processes include, but are not limited to, calculating revenue, deferred revenue and inventory costs. While we continue to automate our processes and enhance our review and put in place controls to reduce the likelihood for errors, we expect that for the foreseeable future, many of our processes will remain manually intensive and thus subject to human error.
Any acquisitions we make could disrupt our business and harm our financial condition and operations.
We have made strategic acquisitions of businesses, technologies and other assets in the past. While we have no current agreements or commitments, we may in the future acquire businesses, product lines or technologies. In the event of any future acquisitions, we may not ultimately strengthen our competitive position or achieve our goals, or they may be viewed negatively by customers, financial markets or investors and we could:
| • | issue stock that would dilute our current stockholders’ percentage ownership; |
| • | incur debt and assume other liabilities; or |
| • | incur amortization expenses related to goodwill and other intangible assets and/or incur large and immediate write-offs. |
Acquisitions also involve numerous risks, including:
| • | problems integrating the acquired operations, technologies or products with our own; |
| • | diversion of management’s attention from our core business; |
| • | assumption of unknown liabilities; |
| • | adverse effects on existing business relationships with suppliers and customers; |
| • | increased accounting compliance risk; |
26
Table of Contents
| • | risks associated with entering new markets; and |
| • | potential loss of key employees. |
We may not be able to successfully integrate any businesses, products, technologies or personnel that we might acquire in the future. Our failure to do so could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and operating results.
Our use and reliance upon development resources in India, China and Canada may expose us to unanticipated costs or liabilities.
We have established development centers in India, China and Canada and expect to continue to increase hiring of personnel for these facilities. There is no assurance that our reliance upon development resources in India, China or Canada will enable us to achieve meaningful cost reductions or greater resource efficiency. Further, our development efforts and other operations in these countries involve significant risks, including:
| • | difficulty hiring and retaining appropriate engineering resources due to intense competition for such resources and resulting wage inflation; |
| • | the knowledge transfer related to our technology and exposure to misappropriation of intellectual property or confidential information, including information that is proprietary to us, our customers and other third parties; |
| • | heightened exposure to changes in the economic, security and political conditions of India, China and Canada; |
| • | fluctuation in currency exchange rates and tax risks associated with international operations; and |
| • | development efforts that do not meet our requirements because of language, cultural or other differences associated with international operations, resulting in errors or delays. |
Difficulties resulting from the factors above and other risks related to our operations in these countries could expose us to increased expense, impair our development efforts, harm our competitive position and damage our reputation.
Unforeseen health, safety and environmental costs could harm our business.
Our manufacturing operations use substances that are regulated by various federal, state and international laws governing health, safety and the environment, including the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment and Restriction of the Use of Certain Hazardous Substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment regulations adopted by the European Union. If we experience a problem with these substances, it could cause an interruption or delay in our manufacturing operations or could cause us to incur liabilities for any costs related to health, safety or environmental remediation. We could also be subject to liability if we do not handle these substances in compliance with safety standards for storage and transportation and applicable laws. If we experience a problem or fail to comply with such safety standards, our business, financial condition and operating results may be harmed.
We are subject to governmental import and export controls that could subject us to liability or impair our ability to compete in international markets.
We are subject to export control laws that limit which products we sell and where and to whom we sell our products. U.S. export control laws also limit our ability to conduct product development activities in certain countries. In addition, various countries regulate the import of certain technologies and have enacted laws that could limit our ability to distribute our products or could limit our customers’ ability to implement our products in those countries. Changes in our products or changes in import and export regulations may create delays in the introduction of our products in international markets, prevent our customers with international operations from deploying our products throughout their global systems or, in some cases, prevent the import and export of our products to certain countries altogether. Any change in import and export regulations or related legislation, shift in approach to the enforcement or scope of existing regulations, or change in the countries, persons or technologies
27
Table of Contents
targeted by such regulations, could result in decreased use of our products by, or in our decreased ability to export or sell our products to, existing or potential customers with international operations. Failure to comply with these and similar laws on a timely basis, or at all, decreased use of our products or any limitation on our ability to export or sell our products would adversely affect our business, financial condition and operating results.
If we need additional capital in the future, it may not be available to us on favorable terms, or at all.
Our business requires significant capital. We have historically relied on significant outside debt and equity financing as well as cash flow from operations to fund our operations, capital expenditures and expansion. We may require additional capital from equity or debt financings in the future to fund our operations or respond to competitive pressures or strategic opportunities. We have a history of significant operating losses. For 2012, we had a net loss of $85.3 million. In the event that we require additional capital, we may not be able to secure timely additional financing on favorable terms, or at all. The terms of any additional financing may place limits on our financial and operating flexibility. If we raise additional funds through further issuances of equity, convertible debt securities or other securities convertible into equity, our existing stockholders could suffer dilution in their percentage ownership of our company, and any new securities we issue could have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock. If we are unable to obtain adequate financing or financing on terms satisfactory to us, if and when we require it, our ability to grow or support our business and to respond to business challenges could be limited and our business will be harmed.
We are subject to government regulations that could adversely impact our business.
The Federal Communications Commission, or FCC, has jurisdiction over the entire U.S. communications industry and, as a result, our products and our U.S. customers are subject to FCC rules and regulations. Current and future FCC regulations affecting communications services, our products or our customers’ businesses could negatively affect our business. In addition, international regulatory standards could impair our ability to develop products for international customers in the future. Moreover, many jurisdictions are evaluating or implementing regulations relating to cyber security, privacy and data protection, which can affect the market and requirements for networking and communications equipment. Delays caused by our compliance with regulatory requirements could result in postponements or cancellations of product orders. Further, we may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining any regulatory approvals that may, in the future, be required to operate our business. Any failure to obtain such approvals could harm our business and operating results.
Natural disasters, terrorist attacks or other catastrophic events could harm our operations.
Our headquarters and the majority of our infrastructure, including our PIC fabrication manufacturing facility, are located in Northern California, an area that is susceptible to earthquakes and other natural disasters. Further, a terrorist attack aimed at Northern California or at our nation’s energy or telecommunications infrastructure could hinder or delay the development and sale of our products. In the event that an earthquake, terrorist attack or other catastrophe were to destroy any part of our facilities, or certain of our contract manufacturers’ facilities, destroy or disrupt vital infrastructure systems or interrupt our operations for any extended period of time, our business, financial condition and operating results would be harmed.
Security incidents, such as data breaches and cyber-attacks, could compromise our intellectual property and proprietary or confidential information and cause significant damage to our business and reputation.
In the ordinary course of our business, we maintain sensitive data on our networks, including data related to our intellectual property and data related to our business and that of our customers and business partners that is considered proprietary or confidential information. We believe that companies in the technology industry have been increasingly subject to a wide variety of security incidents, cyber-attacks and other attempts to gain unauthorized access. While the secure maintenance of this information is critical to our business and reputation, our network and storage applications may be subject to unauthorized access by hackers or breached due to operator error, malfeasance or other system disruptions. It may be difficult to anticipate or immediately detect such security incidents or data breaches and the damage caused as a result. Accordingly, a data breach, cyber-attack, or unauthorized access or disclosure of our information, could compromise our intellectual property and reveal proprietary or confidential business information. In addition, these security incidents could also cause us to incur
28
Table of Contents
significant remediation costs and expenses, disrupt key business operations, subject us to liability and divert attention of management and key information technology resources, any of which could cause significant harm to our business and reputation.
The trading price of our common stock has been volatile and is likely to be volatile in the future.
The trading prices of our common stock and the securities of other technology companies have been and may continue to be highly volatile. Further, our common stock has limited prior trading history. Factors affecting the trading price of our common stock include:
| • | variations in our operating results; |
| • | announcements of technological innovations, new services or service enhancements, strategic alliances or agreements by us or by our competitors; |
| • | the gain or loss of customers; |
| • | recruitment or departure of key personnel; |
| • | changes in the estimates of our future operating results or external guidance on those results or changes in recommendations by any securities analysts that elect to follow our common stock; |
| • | market conditions in our industry, the industries of our customers and the economy as a whole; and |
| • | adoption or modification of regulations, policies, procedures or programs applicable to our business. |
In addition, if the market for technology stocks or the stock market in general experiences loss of investor confidence, the trading price of our common stock could decline for reasons unrelated to our business, financial condition or operating results. The trading price of our common stock might also decline in reaction to events that affect other companies in our industry even if these events do not directly affect us. Each of these factors, among others, could harm the value of your investment in our common stock. Some companies that have had volatile market prices for their securities have had securities class action lawsuits filed against them. If a suit were filed against us, regardless of its merits or outcome, it could result in substantial costs and divert management’s attention and resources.
Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and Delaware law could discourage delay or prevent a change in control of our company and may affect the trading price of our common stock.
We are a Delaware corporation and the anti-takeover provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which apply to us, may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control by prohibiting us from engaging in a business combination with an interested stockholder for a period of three years after the person becomes an interested stockholder, even if a change of control would be beneficial to our existing stockholders. In addition, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a change in our management or control over us that stockholders may consider favorable. Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws:
| • | authorize the issuance of “blank check” convertible preferred stock that could be issued by our board of directors to thwart a takeover attempt; |
| • | establish a classified board of directors, as a result of which the successors to the directors whose terms have expired will be elected to serve from the time of election and qualification until the third annual meeting following their election; |
| • | require that directors only be removed from office for cause and only upon a supermajority stockholder vote; |
| • | provide that vacancies on the board of directors, including newly-created directorships, may be filled only by a majority vote of directors then in office rather than by stockholders; |
| • | prevent stockholders from calling special meetings; and |
| • | prohibit stockholder action by written consent, requiring all actions to be taken at a meeting of the stockholders. |
29
Table of Contents
| ITEM 1B. | UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS |
Not applicable.
| ITEM 2. | PROPERTIES |
Our headquarters are located in Sunnyvale, California. We lease facilities in North America and Asia. The following is a summary of the locations, functions and approximate square footage of those facilities as of December 29, 2012:
| Location |
Function |
Square Footage |
||||
| Sunnyvale, CA |
Corporate headquarters and manufacturing | 211,000 | ||||
| Allentown, PA |
Manufacturing and research and development | 44,000 | ||||
| Annapolis Junction, MD |
Research and development, service and support | 12,000 | ||||
| Bangalore, India |
Research and development | 51,000 | ||||
| Beijing, China |
Research and development | 22,000 | ||||
| Kanata, Canada |
Research and development | 6,000 | ||||
| Hong Kong, China |
Sales, service and support | 3,000 | ||||
| Tokyo, Japan |
Sales and support | 2,000 | ||||
The above leases expire between 2013 and 2021. We intend to add new facilities and to expand existing facilities as we add employees, and we believe that suitable additional or substitute space will be available as needed to accommodate any such expansion of our operations. We believe that our existing facilities are adequate to meet our business needs through the next 12 months.
| ITEM 3. | LEGAL PROCEEDINGS |
Cheetah Patent Infringement Litigation
On May 9, 2006, we and Level 3 were sued by Cheetah in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Texarkana Division for alleged infringement of patent no. 6,795,605 (the “‘605 Patent”), and a continuation thereof. On May 16, 2006, Cheetah filed an amended complaint, which requested an order to enjoin the sale of our DTN platform and to recover all damages caused by the alleged willful infringement including any and all compensatory damages available by law, such as actual and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, associated interest and Cheetah’s costs incurred in the lawsuit. Cheetah’s complaint does not request a specific dollar amount for these compensatory damages. We are contractually obligated to indemnify Level 3 for damages suffered by Level 3 to the extent its product supplied by us is found to infringe, and we have assumed the defense of this matter. On July 20, 2006, we and Level 3 filed an amended response denying all infringement claims under the ‘605 Patent and asserting that the claims of the ‘605 Patent are invalid and that the DTN platform does not infringe the ‘605 Patent. On November 28, 2006, Cheetah filed a second amended complaint and added patent no. 7,142,347 (the “‘347 Patent”) to the lawsuit. On December 18, 2006, we and Level 3 filed responses to Cheetah’s second amended complaint denying all infringement claims under the ‘347 Patent and we and Level 3 asserted counterclaims against Cheetah asserting that the claims are invalid and that the DTN platform does not infringe the patents.
On January 30, 2007, Cheetah filed a third amended complaint adding additional assertions of infringement for the two patents in suit. On February 16, 2007, we and Level 3 filed responses to Cheetah’s third amended complaint denying all infringement claims, and we and Level 3 asserted counterclaims against Cheetah asserting that the claims of the patents are invalid and that the DTN platform does not infringe the patents.
On March 14, 2007, we submitted requests to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “U.S. PTO”) for inter partes reexamination of the ‘605 Patent and the ‘347 Patent asking the U.S. PTO to reexamine the patents based on prior art in order to invalidate the patents or limit the scope of each patent’s claims.
On April 12, 2007, the court granted the motion staying all proceedings in the lawsuit. On June 26, 2007, the U.S. PTO also ordered reexamination of the ‘605 Patent and on August 1, 2007, the U.S. PTO ordered reexamination of the ‘347 Patent. As a result, all proceedings in this lawsuit were stayed until the final resolution of these reexaminations.
30
Table of Contents
In a communication we received from the U.S. PTO dated December 4, 2009, we were advised that various claims in the ‘347 Patent reexamination have been allowed, while other claims have been rejected. In a communication we received from the U.S. PTO dated June 22, 2010, we were advised that various claims in the ‘605 Patent reexamination have been allowed, while other claims have been rejected.
On March 30, 2012, the Board Patent Appeals Interferences (“BPAI”) affirmed the Examiner’s allowance of certain claims in the reexamination of the ‘347 Patent and ‘605 Patent. We filed a request for reconsideration of the BPAI’s decision on April 30, 2012, which was denied in a Decision on Request for Rehearing dated September 27, 2012. We have appealed the BPAI’s decision to the Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit in a Notice of Appeal dated November 26, 2012. On November 9, 2012, Cheetah’s counsel filed another motion requesting the court to lift the stay. The court granted Cheetah’s motion and lifted the stay in an order dated January 8, 2013.
Based on the information available at this time, we concluded that the likelihood of a loss with respect to this suit is less than reasonably possible and therefore, a range of loss cannot be provided. As a result, we have made no provision for this lawsuit in our financial statements. Factors that we considered in the determination of the likelihood of a loss in respect to this matter included the merits of the case, the nature of the litigation (including the complex and technical nature of patent litigation), the length of time the matter has been pending, the status of the re-examination of the underlying patents at issue by the U.S. PTO, the status of the plaintiff as a non-operating entity, and the lack of any specific amount (or range of amounts) for the alleged damages sought in the complaint.
Cambrian Science Patent Infringement Litigation
On July 12, 2011, we were notified by Level 3 that Cambrian filed suit against Level 3 and six other defendants, including Cox Communications, Inc., XO Communications, LLC, Global Crossing Limited, 360Networks (USA), Inc., Integra Telecom, Inc. and IXC, Inc. dba Telekenex (collectively, the “Defendants”) in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California alleging infringement of patent no. 6,775,312 (the “’312 Patent”) and requesting damages for such alleged infringement (the “Cambrian Claim”). The nature of the Cambrian Claim involves allegations of infringement of the ’312 Patent resulting from the Defendants’ use of certain products and systems in the Defendants’ networks, including our DTN platform. On August 24, 2011, Cambrian amended the complaint to name Infinera as a defendant. We assumed the defense of the Cambrian Claim and filed an answer to Cambrian’s complaint on September 21, 2011, in which we denied infringement of the ‘312 Patent and raised other defenses. Cambrian filed a second amended complaint on October 6, 2011, which included many of the same allegations as in the original complaint. We filed our answer to the second amended complaint on October 21, 2011, in which we maintained the same denials and defenses as in our initial answer. On December 23, 2011, we filed a motion requesting that the court stay the case with respect to each of the above-noted customer Defendants. Cambrian filed its opposition to our motion on December 30, 2011. Our request was denied in the court’s decision on March 7, 2012. We presented evidence on the appropriate meanings of relevant key words used in the patent claims during a claim construction hearing on November 20, 2012. We are awaiting the court’s decision on the meaning of various claim terms.
We may be subject to liability pursuant to the indemnification provisions of our agreements with our customers, including the Defendants, should the outcome of the Cambrian Claim be unfavorable to the Defendants. Based on the information available at this time, we concluded that the likelihood of a loss with respect to this suit is less than reasonably possible and therefore, a range of loss cannot be provided. As a result, we have made no provision for this lawsuit in our financial statements. Factors that we considered in the determination of the likelihood of a loss in respect to this matter included the merits of the case, the nature of the litigation (including the complex and technical nature of patent litigation), the length of time the matter has been pending, and the status of the plaintiff as a non-operating entity.
In addition to the matters described above, we are subject to various legal proceedings, claims and litigation arising in the ordinary course of business. While the outcome of these matters is currently not determinable, we do not expect that the ultimate costs to resolve these matters will have a material effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.
| ITEM 4. | MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES |
Not Applicable.
31
Table of Contents
| ITEM 5. | MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES |
Our common stock is listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “INFN.” The following table sets forth, for the time periods indicated, the high and low sales prices of our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Global Select Market.
| High | Low | |||||||
| Fourth Quarter 2012 |
$ | 6.15 | $ | 4.33 | ||||
| Third Quarter 2012 |
$ | 7.40 | $ | 5.29 | ||||
| Second Quarter 2012 |
$ | 8.15 | $ | 6.02 | ||||
| First Quarter 2012 |
$ | 8.90 | $ | 6.26 | ||||
| Fourth Quarter 2011 |
$ | 8.61 | $ | 6.07 | ||||
| Third Quarter 2011 |
$ | 8.97 | $ | 6.00 | ||||
| Second Quarter 2011 |
$ | 8.75 | $ | 5.91 | ||||
| First Quarter 2011 |
$ | 11.15 | $ | 7.13 | ||||
As of February 25, 2013, there were 132 registered holders of record of Infinera’s common stock. A substantially greater number of holders of Infinera common stock are “street name” or beneficial holders, whose shares are held by banks, brokers and other financial institutions.
We have not paid any cash dividends on our common stock and do not intend to pay any cash dividends on common stock in the foreseeable future.
32
Table of Contents
STOCK PERFORMANCE GRAPH
The following graph compares the cumulative 5-year total return provided stockholders on Infinera Corporation’s common stock relative to the cumulative total returns of the NASDAQ Composite Index and the NASDAQ Telecommunications Index. An investment of $100 (with reinvestment of all dividends, if any) is assumed to have been made in our common stock and in each of the indexes on December 29, 2007 and its relative performance is tracked through December 29, 2012. The NASDAQ Telecommunications Index contains securities of NASDAQ-listed companies classified according to the Industry Classification Benchmark as Telecommunications and Telecommunications Equipment. They include providers of fixed-line and mobile telephone services, and makers and distributors of high-technology communication products. This graph is not deemed to be “filed” with the SEC or subject to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the graph shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any prior or subsequent filing by Infinera under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act.
COMPARISON OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
Among Infinera Corp., the NASDAQ Composite Index,
and the NASDAQ Telecommunications Index
*$100 invested on 12/29/07 in stock or index, including reinvestment of dividends, if any.
Indexes calculated on month-end basis.
33
Table of Contents
| ITEM 6. | SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA |
You should read the following selected consolidated historical financial data below in conjunction with the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the consolidated financial statements, related notes and other financial information included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The selected financial data in this section is not intended to replace the financial statements and is qualified in its entirety by the consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
We derived the statements of operations data for the years ended December 29, 2012, December 31, 2011 and December 25, 2010 and the balance sheet data as of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011 from our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes, which are included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We derived the statements of operations data for the years ended December 26, 2009 and December 27, 2008 and the balance sheet data as of December 25, 2010, December 26, 2009 and December 27, 2008 from our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes which are not included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We have not declared or distributed any cash dividends.
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
December 26, 2009 |
December 27, 2008 |
||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands, except per share data) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Revenue |
$ | 438,437 | $ | 404,877 | $ | 454,352 | $ | 309,101 | $ | 519,212 | ||||||||||
| Gross profit |
$ | 157,569 | $ | 165,491 | $ | 206,189 | $ | 102,101 | $ | 233,555 | ||||||||||
| Net income (loss) |
$ | (85,330 | ) | $ | (81,744 | ) | $ | (27,932 | ) | $ | (86,622 | ) | $ | 78,728 | ||||||
| Net income (loss) per common share |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Basic |
$ | (0.77 | ) | $ | (0.78 | ) | $ | (0.28 | ) | $ | (0.91 | ) | $ | 0.85 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Diluted |
$ | (0.77 | ) | $ | (0.78 | ) | $ | (0.28 | ) | $ | (0.91 | ) | $ | 0.81 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Weighted average number of shares used in computing basic and diluted net income (loss) per common share |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Basic |
110,739 | 105,432 | 99,380 | 95,468 | 92,427 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Diluted |
110,739 | 105,432 | 99,380 | 95,468 | 97,088 | |||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Total cash and cash equivalents, investments and restricted cash |
$ | 187,554 | $ | 253,116 | $ | 295,706 | $ | 275,477 | $ | 312,585 | ||||||||||
| Total assets |
$ | 528,170 | $ | 531,704 | $ | 551,525 | $ | 491,945 | $ | 507,067 | ||||||||||
| Common stock and additional paid-in capital |
$ | 930,730 | $ | 877,034 | $ | 817,302 | $ | 747,677 | $ | 699,799 | ||||||||||
| Stockholders’ equity |
$ | 356,136 | $ | 387,803 | $ | 410,749 | $ | 368,507 | $ | 405,463 | ||||||||||
34
Table of Contents
| ITEM 7. | MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS |
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements” that involve risks and uncertainties, as well as assumptions that, if they never materialize or prove incorrect, could cause our results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements include any expectation of earnings, revenues, gross margins, expenses or other financial items; any statements of the plans, strategies and objectives of management for future operations and personnel; factors that may affect our operating results; statements concerning new products or services, including future PIC capacity and new product delivery and revenue dates; statements related to capital expenditures; statements related to future economic conditions, performance, market growth or our sales cycle; statements related to the liquidity of our auction rate securities; statements as to industry trends and other matters that do not relate strictly to historical facts or statements of assumptions underlying any of the foregoing. These statements are often identified by the use of words such as “anticipate,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” or “will,” and similar expressions or variations. These statements are based on the beliefs and assumptions of our management based on information currently available to management. Such forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and other factors that could cause actual results and the timing of certain events to differ materially from future results expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to, those identified below, and those discussed in the section titled “Risk Factors” included in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. You should review these risk factors for a more complete understanding of the risks associated with an investment in our securities. Such forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this report. We disclaim any obligation to update any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of such statements. The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with our “Selected Consolidated Financial Data” and consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Background
Infinera was founded in December 2000 with a unique vision for optical networking. Prior to Infinera, communications service provider optical networks were built from fairly commoditized products, broadly known as wavelength division multiplexing (“WDM”) systems. Recent growth in bandwidth demand has increased the need for the delivery of high-capacity low-cost bandwidth throughout the network. We believe that traditional point-to-point network architectures do not provide the required flexibility to meet this demand. It takes large amounts of low-cost bandwidth, pervasive Optical Transport Network (“OTN”) switching, and the intelligence of bandwidth management to manage these larger networks and deliver high-capacity services quickly and cost-effectively. Infinera believes this can best be achieved with photonic integrated circuits (“PICs”) and that only through photonic integration can network operators efficiently scale their network bandwidth without significant increases in space, power or operational workload.
We first introduced our Digital Optical Network architecture to the market in 2004. This architecture is based on our unique PICs and enables high-capacity, low-cost bandwidth in the cloud and distributed switching throughout the network. Since 2004, our strategy has been to extend the benefits of our Digital Optical Network throughout the optical networking market. We have made significant enhancements to our Digital Transport Node System (“DTN platform”) during this time by increasing reach and fiber capacity for the long-haul market, adding the Infinera MTC, a 19-inch chassis option tailored for the metro core market, and adding a submarine version of the DTN platform for the Submarine Line Terminating Equipment market. In addition, we introduced our ATN metro access platform (“ATN platform”), extending Infinera’s digital bandwidth management and intelligent network benefits to the network edge.
Traffic patterns in the optical network continue to grow to accommodate increased bandwidth from video, mobility and cloud computing with high-capacity networks migrating from 10 Gigabits per second (“Gbps”) and 40 Gbps wavelength solutions to newly available 100 Gbps solutions. In order to meet the growing bandwidth demands of our customers, we introduced our 40 Gbps non-PIC based solution in the third quarter of 2011 and we launched our DTN-X platform, a 100 Gbps platform based on our 500 Gbps PICs with a 5 Terabit OTN switch in September 2011 and completed our first shipments for customer deployment in the second quarter of 2012. The DTN, DTN-X and ATN platforms are designed to operate as a tightly-integrated network with a single management system providing an end-to-end Digital Optical Network experience.
35
Table of Contents
2012 Financial and Business Performance
2012 was an important year for Infinera. We commenced shipment of our next-generation DTN-X platform in the second quarter with first revenues recognized from the platform in the third quarter. The DTN-X platform has been well received by customers across many markets with purchase commitments received from 22 customers by the end of the year. While new deployments of high-capacity networks are now mostly occurring on the DTN-X platform, we continued to sell the DTN platform where appropriate, with nine new DTN platform customers added in 2012.
DTN-X market traction and the resulting growth in revenue contributed to an improvement in our overall financial performance in the second half of 2012. We had incurred significant DTN-X related manufacturing and research and development expenditures in 2011 and early 2012, in advance of generating revenues from the platform. This resulted in significant losses and cash consumption in those periods. In the second half of 2012, we experienced improved financial metrics with strong sequential quarterly revenue growth, reduced spending levels and improved income statement performance.
Our overall gross margin for 2012 was 36%, decreased from 41% in 2011. This decrease in gross margins in 2012 primarily reflects the impact of early product cycle production costs for the DTN-X platform, increased levels of lower margin network footprint sales and competitive pricing pressure. The industry typically experiences downward pressure on gross margins during network footprint deployments, with higher gross margins achieved as capacity is added to deployed networks.
In 2013, we intend to focus our efforts on leveraging the DTN-X platform to win new network footprint and gain market share. These efforts will be balanced with a focus on product cost improvements and overall prudent financial management. We believe that with sustained revenue growth, we can leverage our vertically-integrated manufacturing model, which combined with selling bandwidth capacity into deployed networks, can result in improved future profitability and cash flow.
Future Business and Industry Trends
Our goal is to be the leading provider of optical networking systems to communications service providers, internet content providers, cable operators, subsea network operators, and others. Our revenue growth will depend on the continued acceptance of our products, growth of communications traffic and the proliferation of next-generation bandwidth-intensive services, which are expected to drive the need for increased levels of bandwidth. Our ability to increase our revenue and achieve profitability will be directly affected by the level of acceptance of our products in the long-haul and metro WDM markets and by our ability to cost-effectively develop and sell innovative products that leverage our technology advantages on a time-to-market basis.
As of December 29, 2012, we have sold our products for deployment in the optical networks of 111 customers worldwide, including Colt, Cox Communications, Deutsche Telekom, Equinix, Interoute, KVH, TeliaSonera, Level 3, NTT, OTE, Pacnet and XO Communications. We do not have long-term sales commitments from our customers. To date, a few of our customers have accounted for a significant portion of our revenue. No customers accounted for over 10% of our revenue in 2012 or 2011. One customer accounted for over 10% of our revenue in 2010. Our business will be harmed if any of our key customers do not generate as much revenue as we forecast, stop purchasing from us, or substantially reduce their orders for our products.
We are headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, with employees located throughout the Americas, Europe, and the Asia Pacific region. We expect to continue to add some personnel in the United States and internationally to develop our products and provide additional geographic sales and technical support coverage. We primarily sell our products through our direct sales force, with a small portion sold indirectly through resellers. We derived 98%, 97% and 98% of our revenue from direct sales to customers for 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. We expect to continue generating a substantial majority of our revenue from direct sales in the future.
Our near-term year-over-year and quarter-over-quarter revenue will likely be volatile and may be impacted by several factors including general economic and market conditions, time-to-market development of new products, acquisitions of new customers and the timing of large product deployments.
36
Table of Contents
We will continue to make significant investments in the business, and management currently believes that operating expenses for 2013 will range from $235 million to $245 million, including stock-based compensation expense of approximately $30 million to $35 million.
Results of Operations
Revenue
The following table sets forth, for periods presented, certain consolidated statements of operations information (in thousands, except %):
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
% of total revenue |
December 31, 2011 |
% of total revenue |
December 25, 2010 |
% of total revenue |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Revenue: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Product |
$ | 378,138 | 86 | % | $ | 349,468 | 86 | % | $ | 401,578 | 89 | % | ||||||||||||
| Ratable product and related support and services |
1,897 | 1 | % | 3,176 | 1 | % | 6,155 | 1 | % | |||||||||||||||
| Services |
58,402 | 13 | % | 52,233 | 13 | % | 46,619 | 10 | % | |||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
| Total revenue |
$ | 438,437 | 100 | % | $ | 404,877 | 100 | % | $ | 454,352 | 100 | % | ||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
| Cost of revenue: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Product |
$ | 258,874 | 59 | % | $ | 219,710 | 54 | % | $ | 225,183 | 50 | % | ||||||||||||
| Ratable product and related support and services |
563 | — | % | 1,096 | — | % | 3,217 | 1 | % | |||||||||||||||
| Services |
21,431 | 5 | % | 18,580 | 5 | % | 19,945 | 4 | % | |||||||||||||||
| Restructuring and other costs (credit) related to cost of revenue |
— | — | % | — | — | % | (182 | ) | — | % | ||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
| Total cost of revenue |
$ | 280,868 | 64 | % | $ | 239,386 | 59 | % | $ | 248,163 | 55 | % | ||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
The following table summarizes our revenue by geography and sales channel for the periods presented (in thousands, except %):
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Total revenue by geography |
||||||||||||
| Domestic |
$ | 296,849 | $ | 283,443 | $ | 342,461 | ||||||
| International |
141,588 | 121,434 | 111,891 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| $ | 438,437 | $ | 404,877 | $ | 454,352 | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| % Revenue by geography |
||||||||||||
| Domestic |
68 | % | 70 | % | 75 | % | ||||||
| International |
32 | % | 30 | % | 25 | % | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total revenue by sales channel |
||||||||||||
| Direct |
$ | 428,734 | $ | 391,811 | $ | 444,168 | ||||||
| Indirect |
9,703 | 13,066 | 10,184 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| $ | 438,437 | $ | 404,877 | $ | 454,352 | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| % Revenue by sales channel |
||||||||||||
| Direct |
98 | % | 97 | % | 98 | % | ||||||
| Indirect |
2 | % | 3 | % | 2 | % | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| 100 | % | 100 | % | 100 | % | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
37
Table of Contents
2012 Compared to 2011. Total revenue increased to $438.4 million in 2012 from $404.9 million in 2011. Revenues were positively impacted by the recognition of revenues from sales of our new DTN-X platform during the second half of 2012. These revenues included sales to existing customers transitioning their higher-capacity network deployments to the DTN-X and new customers purchasing our Digital Optical Network solutions for the first time. While this increase in DTN-X revenues was somewhat offset by a reduction in sales of our DTN platform, we continued to deploy the DTN platform in lower capacity applications with nine new customers in 2012. Revenues for 2011 were negatively impacted when customers who required higher-capacity network solutions in advance of the availability of our 40 Gbps and 100 Gbps systems purchased competitor products for portions of their networks.
International revenue increased to 32% of total revenue in 2012 from 30% of total revenue in 2011. The increases were primarily due to an increased proportion of our sales occurring in Europe. While we expect international revenues to continue to grow in absolute dollars on a long-term basis as we increase our sales activities in Europe, Asia Pacific and other regions, this metric may fluctuate as a percentage of total revenue depending on the size and timing of deployments both internationally and in the United States.
Total product revenue increased to $378.1 million in 2012 from $349.5 million in 2011 reflecting increased sales of our DTN-X platform in the second half of 2012.
Product and related support services revenue that is recognized ratably includes sales of products and services that were deferred under previous accounting standards, prior to our adoption of ASU 2009-13 and ASU 2009-14, because vendor specific objective evidence of fair value had not been established for the undelivered elements. Total ratable revenue levels decreased to $1.9 million in 2012 from $3.2 million in 2011 due to an overall reduction in sales of products and services that were deferred following our adoption of ASU 2009-13 and ASU 2009-14. We have a limited number of software offerings and related support services that will continue to be accounted for under the software revenue recognition rules. We expect to continue to record a small amount of ratable revenue when arrangements include bundled services related to our software offerings for which vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) has not been established.
Total services revenue increased to $58.4 million in 2012 from $52.2 million in 2011 primarily reflecting the incremental recognition of $3.2 million related to deployment services revenue, $1.5 million related to our spares management service revenue, $1.4 million related to extended warranty service revenue, $0.4 million of first line management services revenue, $0.3 million of network management services revenue, and $0.3 million from training services revenue, offset by a decrease of $0.9 million related to our software subscription service revenue. The increase in deployment services in 2012 was primarily due to the introduction and deployment of new networks based on our DTN-X platform. In addition, we expect to continue to grow our extended hardware warranty and spares management services revenues in future periods as our installed base continues to grow.
2011 Compared to 2010. Total revenue decreased to $404.9 million in 2011 from $454.4 million in 2010. The decrease in revenue was primarily due to a reduction in demand from existing customers, reflecting increased customer demand for higher capacity solutions that we did not offer in 2011 and a reduction in overall demand from Level 3.
International revenue increased to 30% of total revenue in 2011 from 25% of total revenue in 2010. The increases were primarily due to an increased proportion of our sales occurring in Europe. While we expect international revenues to continue to grow in absolute dollars on a long-term basis as we increase our sales activities in Europe, Asia Pacific and other regions, this metric may fluctuate as a percentage of total revenue depending on the size and timing of deployments both internationally and in the United States.
Total product revenue decreased to $349.5 million in 2011 from $401.6 million in 2010. A reduction in demand from existing customers, including Level 3, combined with a competitive pricing environment during 2011, were the key drivers for the reduction in product revenues.
Product and related support services revenue that is recognized ratably includes sales of products and services that were deferred under previous accounting standards, prior to our adoption of ASU 2009-13 and ASU 2009-14, because vendor specific objective evidence of fair value had not been established for the
38
Table of Contents
undelivered elements. Total ratable revenue levels decreased to $3.2 million in 2011 from $6.2 million in 2010 due to an overall reduction in sales of products and services that were deferred following our adoption of ASU 2009-13 and ASU 2009-14. We have a limited number of software offerings and related support services that will continue to be accounted for under the software revenue recognition rules. We expect to continue to record a small amount of ratable revenue when arrangements include bundled services related to our software offerings for which VSOE has not been established.
Total services revenue increased to $52.2 million in 2011 from $46.6 million in 2010 primarily reflecting the incremental recognition of $5.4 million related to extended hardware warranty service revenue, $2.5 million related to our software subscription service revenue, $1.8 million related to our spares management service revenue, $0.4 million of network management services revenue, and $0.4 million of first line management services revenue, partially offset by decrease of $4.9 million related to deployment services revenue. As our installed customer base grows, we expect to continue to grow our extended hardware warranty and spares management services revenues in future periods.
Cost of Revenue and Gross Margin
2012 Compared to 2011. Gross margin decreased to 36% in 2012 from 41% in 2011. Gross margin in 2012 reflected the recognition of revenues from the initial sales of our DTN-X platform. These sales represented early production units and as such, had a higher product cost. The transition of a portion of our revenues from the DTN platform to these lower-margin initial DTN-X units contributed to a decline in gross margins in the second half of the year. In addition, costs for the first half of 2012 included pre-production costs associated with the DTN-X platform production ramp. We also experienced a higher level of lower margin network footprint sales in the second half of 2012, as we began DTN-X platform deployments. Competition for new 100 Gbps deployments has been strong, which has resulted in a highly-competitive pricing environment for new deployments during 2012.
2011 Compared to 2010. Gross margin decreased to 41% in 2011 from 45% in 2010. This decrease primarily reflected incremental costs associated with the expansion of our PIC fabrication (“PIC FAB”) facility and new product introduction costs related to our next-generation products combined with reduced product shipments and the need for increased pricing discounts in order to remain competitive.
See Note 7, “Restructuring and Other Related Costs,” to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information on our restructuring plan under which we closed our Maryland-based semiconductor fabrication plant (“Maryland FAB”).
Based on our current outlook, we expect downward pressure on gross margins to continue for the next several quarters as we focus on winning new network footprint and gaining market share, while continuing to drive cost reductions on the DTN-X platform. We do not have the visibility necessary to accurately predict quarterly gross margins beyond this time horizon, but believe that increased revenues and improved product mix can allow for some margin expansion later in 2013 and in future years.
Operating Expenses
The following table summarizes our operating expenses for the periods presented (in thousands, except %):
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
% of total revenue |
December 31, 2011 |
% of total revenue |
December 25, 2010 |
% of total revenue |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Research and development |
$ | 117,233 | 27 | % | $ | 127,120 | 31 | % | $ | 118,518 | 26 | % | ||||||||||||
| Sales and marketing |
75,862 | 17 | % | 64,773 | 16 | % | 58,103 | 13 | % | |||||||||||||||
| General and administrative |
47,475 | 11 | % | 54,375 | 14 | % | 58,098 | 13 | % | |||||||||||||||
| Restructuring and other costs (credit) |
— | — | % | (129 | ) | — | % | 159 | — | % | ||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
| Total operating expenses |
$ | 240,570 | 55 | % | $ | 246,139 | 61 | % | $ | 234,878 | 52 | % | ||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
39
Table of Contents
The following table summarizes the stock-based compensation expense included in our operating expenses (in thousands):
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Research and development |
$ | 13,306 | $ | 14,990 | $ | 14,301 | ||||||
| Sales and marketing |
10,450 | 8,818 | 7,896 | |||||||||
| General and administration |
9,529 | 18,502 | 19,903 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total |
$ | 33,285 | $ | 42,310 | $ | 42,100 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Research and Development Expenses
2012 Compared to 2011. Research and development expenses decreased $9.9 million in 2012 from 2011. This reduction was primarily due to $8.6 million of research and development resources redeployed to manufacturing in support of initial DTN-X production builds. In addition, prototype and other equipment spending decreased by $5.7 million in 2012, following the release of the DTN-X platform. These decreases were partially offset by $2.6 million of increased depreciation, $0.6 million increase in professional and outside services and $0.6 million increase in facilities and other costs, as compared to 2011. Total other personnel-related costs increased by $0.6 million. This increase was comprised of $2.3 million increase of cash compensation offset by $1.7 million decrease of stock-based compensation expense.
2011 Compared to 2010. Research and development expenses increased $8.6 million in 2011 from 2010 primarily due to increased headcount and personnel-related costs of $2.6 million primarily associated with next-generation product development. This was comprised of $1.9 million of cash compensation and $0.7 million of stock-based compensation expense. In addition, during 2011, we incurred $1.6 million of increased depreciation, $1.4 million increase in professional and outside services, $1.1 million in travel and entertainment expenses, $1.2 million increase in spending on equipment and software, and $0.7 million increase in facilities and other costs, as compared to 2010.
Sales and Marketing Expenses
2012 Compared to 2011. Sales and marketing expenses increased $11.1 million in 2012 from 2011 primarily due to $4.7 million related to increased expenses for customer lab trials, $3.7 million in compensation and personnel-related expenses due to increased headcount, $1.6 million of increased stock-based compensation expense, $0.7 million of increased travel and related expenses and $0.4 million of increased facilities and other costs. This increase in spending primarily reflects the ongoing impact of incremental sales resources to support the expansion of our addressable markets with the introduction of the DTN-X platform.
2011 Compared to 2010. Sales and marketing expenses increased $6.7 million in 2011 from 2010 primarily due to $2.7 million in compensation and personnel-related expenses due to increased headcount, $1.7 million of increased travel and related expenses, $1.2 million of increased marketing program expenses and trade show costs, $0.9 million of increased stock-based compensation expense, a $0.4 million increase related to outside professional services, $0.6 million of increased facilities and other costs, and $0.2 million related to increased expenses for customer lab trials. These increases were offset by $1.0 million in decreased sales commission expense.
General and Administrative Expenses
2012 Compared to 2011. General and administrative expenses decreased $6.9 million in 2012 from 2011 primarily due to $9.0 million of decreased stock-based compensation expense, which included the impact of reduced management bonuses and other changes in equity grant activity, and $0.2 million decrease in facilities and other costs. These decreases were partially offset by increased professional services costs of $1.6 million primarily related to implementation of our new enterprise resource planning system and related increased depreciation costs of $0.7 million.
40
Table of Contents
2011 Compared to 2010. General and administrative expenses decreased $3.7 million in 2011 from 2010 primarily due to a $2.1 million decrease in cash compensation which included the impact of reduced management bonuses, $1.4 million of decreased stock-based compensation expense, and a $0.7 million decrease in facilities and other costs. These decreases were partially offset by increased depreciation costs of $0.4 million and increased professional services costs of $0.1 million.
Restructuring and Other Costs
In 2011, we recorded a credit of $0.1 million due to a change in estimates associated with facility-related costs. In 2010, we incurred $0.2 million of restructuring and other costs associated with the closure of our Maryland FAB. We completed our restructuring actions in 2010. For more information, see Note 7, “Restructuring and Other Related Costs,” to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Other Income (Expense), Net
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| (In thousands) | ||||||||||||
| Interest income |
$ | 911 | $ | 1,014 | $ | 1,390 | ||||||
| Other gain (loss), net |
(1,050 | ) | (419 | ) | (316 | ) | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total other income (expense), net |
$ | (139 | ) | $ | 595 | $ | 1,074 | |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
2012 Compared to 2011. Interest income decreased $0.1 million in 2012 from 2011 mainly due to lower average investment balances. Other gain (loss), net for 2012 includes $1.5 million of unrealized and realized losses due to foreign currency exchange, partially offset by a gain of $0.5 million from ARS called at par value.
2011 Compared to 2010. Interest income decreased $0.4 million in 2011 from 2010 due to lower interest rates on investments and lower average investment balances. Other gain (loss), net for 2011 includes $1.0 million of unrealized and realized losses due to foreign currency exchange, a gain of $0.3 million from the sale of assets and a gain of $0.2 million related to an insurance claim settlement.
Income Tax Provision
We recognized income tax expense of approximately $2.2 million, $1.7 million and $0.3 million in each of fiscal years 2012, 2011, and 2010, on pre-tax book losses of $83.1 million, $80.1 million, and $27.6 million, respectively. The resulting effective tax rates of 2.6%, 2.1%, and 1.1% for 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively, differs from the expected statutory rate of 35% based upon unbenefited U.S. losses, non-deductible stock compensation charges and foreign taxes provided on foreign subsidiary earnings. The increase in the 2012 and 2011 tax expense compared to the 2010 tax expense relates primarily to the expiration of the India tax holiday, as well as an increase in India transfer pricing reserves, in accordance to Accounting Standards Codification 740, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes. Our India subsidiary operated under a tax holiday, which expired on March 31, 2011, and the net impact of this tax holiday in prior years was to decrease our net loss by approximately $0.5 million in 2010, resulting in no earnings per share impact in that year. Further, the increase in tax expense in 2012 compared to 2011 relates to reductions of benefits from Canadian research credits.
During 2012, 2011 and 2010, income tax benefits of zero, $0.1 million and $0.3 million for each year were allocated to the tax provision from continuing operations, related to the tax effects of items credited directly to other comprehensive income (“OCI”). Generally, the amount of tax expense or benefit allocated to continuing operations is determined without regard to the tax effects of other categories of income or loss, such as OCI. However, an exception to the general rule is provided within the intra-period tax allocations rules when there is a pre-tax loss from continuing operations and there are items charged or credited to other categories, including OCI, in the current year. The intra-period tax allocation rules related to items charged or credited directly to OCI can result in disproportionate tax effects that remain in OCI until certain events occur.
41
Table of Contents
The valuation allowance for deferred tax assets as of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011 was $213.4 million and $188.4 million, respectively. The net change in the valuation allowance was an increase of $25.1 million and $32.5 million for the years ended December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.
As of December 29, 2012, we had net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $338.4 million for federal tax purposes and $297.7 million for state tax purposes. If not utilized, these carryforwards will begin to expire in 2021 for federal tax purposes and 2015 for state tax purposes. Additionally, we have federal and California research and development credits available to reduce future income taxes payable of approximately $22.9 million, respectively. The federal research credits will begin to expire in the year 2021 if not utilized, while the California research credits have no expiration date.
We maintain net operating losses generated from excess tax benefits associated with the accumulated stock award attributes in a memo account, not included in the deferred tax inventory balances. The additional tax benefit associated with these stock award attributes, of which the net operating loss amounts are included in the carryforward amounts noted above, is not recognized until the deduction reduces cash taxes payable. At December 29, 2012, we had unbenefited stock option deductions for federal and California tax purposes of $36.8 million and $35.6 million, respectively. When utilized, the estimated tax benefits of approximately $14.7 million will result in a credit to stockholders’ equity.
Under the Tax Reform Act of 1986, the amount of benefit from net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards may be impaired or limited in certain circumstances. Events which cause limitations in the amount of net operating losses that we may utilize in any one year include, but are not limited to, a cumulative ownership change of more than 50 percent as defined, over a three-year testing period. As of December 29, 2012, we had determined that ownership changes have occurred that would result in limitations on the current and future utilization of its net operating loss carryforwards. However, based on the work performed, the limitations are not significant enough to impact the future utilization of the tax attributes.
In determining future taxable income, we make assumptions to forecast federal, state and international operating income, the reversal of temporary differences, and the implementation of any feasible and prudent tax planning strategies. The assumptions require significant judgment regarding the forecasts of future taxable income, and are consistent with our income forecasts used to manage our business. We intend to maintain the remaining valuation allowance until sufficient further positive evidence exists to support a reversal of, or decrease, in the existing valuation allowance.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| (In thousands) | ||||||||||||
| Net cash flow provided by (used in): |
||||||||||||
| Operating activities |
$ | (49,466 | ) | $ | (1,965 | ) | $ | 30,537 | ||||
| Investing activities |
$ | 48,868 | $ | (25,168 | ) | $ | (45,722 | ) | ||||
| Financing activities |
$ | 10,698 | $ | 8,513 | $ | 18,985 | ||||||
| Years Ended | ||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
|||||||
| (In thousands) | ||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 104,666 | $ | 94,458 | ||||
| Short-term and long-term investments |
79,020 | 155,611 | ||||||
| Short-term and long-term restricted cash |
3,868 | 3,047 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| $ | 187,554 | $ | 253,116 | |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
Cash, cash equivalents, short-term and long-term investments and short-term and long-term restricted cash consist of highly-liquid investments in certificates of deposits, money market funds, commercial paper, corporate bonds, U.S. agency notes and U.S. treasuries. As of December 29, 2012, long-term investments included
42
Table of Contents
$3.1 million (par value) of available-for-sale auction rate securities (“ARS”). The restricted cash balance amounts are pledged as collateral for certain stand-by and commercial letters of credit.
Operating Activities
Net cash used in operating activities for 2012 was $49.5 million as compared to net cash used in operating activities of $2.0 million in 2011 and $30.5 million net cash provided by operating activities in 2010. Cash flow from operating activities consists of net income (loss), adjusted for non-cash charges, plus or minus working capital changes. Our working capital requirements can fluctuate significantly depending on the timing of deployments and the acceptance, billing and payment terms on those deployments. Additionally, our ability to manage inventory turns and our ability to negotiate favorable payment terms with our vendors may also impact our working capital requirements.
Net loss for 2012 was $85.3 million, which included non-cash charges of $67.2 million, compared to a net loss of $81.7 million in the corresponding period in 2011, including non-cash charges of $72.2 million. Net loss for 2010 was $27.9 million, which included non-cash charges of $69.2 million.
Net cash used to fund working capital was $31.3 million for 2012. This increase in working capital requirements was primarily related to the introduction of our DTN-X platform. Inventory levels increased by $40.6 million as we added inventory for the DTN-X platform while maintaining DTN levels. Accounts receivable increased by $26.5 million primarily due to the timing of acceptance and invoicing of DTN-X platform deployments during the second half of 2012. Accrued liabilities increased by $6.9 million primarily related to external services performed but not invoiced by vendors.
The deterioration in operating results in 2011 as compared to 2010 was the key driver for the significant change in cash flows for 2011. Net cash provided by working capital was $7.5 million for 2011. Working capital requirements for the fourth quarter of 2011 were impacted by the disruption of the supply chain due to flooding events in Thailand. The net effect of this event on cash provided by working capital was a usage of cash of $1.4 million. Included in prepaid expenses and other assets was an $11.1 million decrease in deferred tax assets which was offset by a corresponding decrease in deferred tax liabilities included in accrued liabilities and other expenses. Other working capital changes included a reduction of other receivables of $3.4 million, reduction of deferred inventory costs of $2.0 million and an increase in warranty accruals of $1.4 million.
The improved operating results in 2010 as compared to 2009 were the key driver for the improvement in cash flows for 2010. Net cash used to fund working capital was $10.8 million for 2010 primarily due to an increase in inventory of $13.1 million and an increase in accounts receivable of $6.8 million, offset by an increase in accrued liabilities of $9.2 million. We increased our inventory levels in early 2010 in response to industry supply chain constraints and expected increased customer demand for our products. However, revenues in the fourth quarter were lower than expected resulting in higher inventory levels exiting 2010. Accounts receivable increased primarily reflecting invoicing trends that were weighted towards the end of the period. Accrued liabilities and other expenses increased due to the timing and level of compensation related payments.
Investing Activities
Net cash provided by investing activities in 2012 was $48.9 million primarily reflecting net proceeds of $75.0 million from maturities, calls and sales of investments, net of purchases in the period, offset by $25.4 million of capital expenditures.
Net cash used in investing activities in 2011 was $25.2 million primarily reflecting $39.4 million of capital expenditures and net proceeds of $18.5 million from maturities, calls and sales of investments, net of purchases in the period. We also invested an additional $4.5 million in an existing cost-method equity investment.
Net cash used in investing activities in 2010 was $45.7 million primarily reflecting a net usage of cash of $20.8 million from purchases, net of maturities and calls of investments which also included proceeds of $24.5 million related to our exercise of the put rights associated with our UBS Financial Services, Inc. ARS. Additionally, we used $20.7 million related to capital expenditures during the year and we made a $4.5 million cost-method equity investment in the second quarter of 2010.
43
Table of Contents
Financing Activities
Net proceeds from financing activities in 2012 were $10.7 million primarily related to $11.6 million in proceeds from the issuance of common stock under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”) and other equity plans. This was offset by $0.9 million related to the repurchase of shares from employees to satisfy minimum tax withholdings.
Net proceeds from financing activities in 2011 were $8.5 million primarily related to $10.0 million in proceeds from the issuance of common stock under our ESPP and other equity plans. This was offset by $1.2 million related to the repurchase of shares from employees to satisfy minimum tax withholdings and $0.3 million related to payments for purchase of assets under a financing arrangement.
Net proceeds from financing activities in 2010 were $19.0 million primarily related to $19.3 million in proceeds from the issuance of common stock under our ESPP and other equity plans. This was offset by $0.3 million related to payments for purchase of assets under a financing arrangement.
Liquidity
As of December 29, 2012, we held an A3 rated available-for-sale ARS at $3.1 million (par value) with a fair value of $2.9 million with one issuer. This ARS has a contractual maturity term of up to 33.0 years and it is not clear when we will be able to liquidate this investment. In 2009, we determined that the present value of the expected cash flows for this security was below its par value, and recorded an initial other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) of $2.7 million, equal to the difference between the fair value and the par value had occurred. During 2012, $0.2 million of this ARS was called at par value.
Failed auctions resulted in a lack of liquidity in the ARS, but did not affect the underlying collateral of the security. We do not anticipate that any potential lack of liquidity in our ARS, even for an extended period of time, will affect our ability to finance our operations, including our continued investments in research and development and planned capital expenditures. We continue to monitor efforts by the financial markets to find alternative means for restoring the liquidity of this investment. Our ARS investment is classified as a non-current asset until we have better visibility as to when its liquidity will be restored.
For 2013, capital expenditures are expected to be in the range of approximately $20 million to $25 million, primarily for product development.
We believe that our current cash and cash equivalents and investments will be sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs for working capital and capital expenditures for at least 12 months. If these sources of cash are insufficient to satisfy our liquidity requirements beyond 12 months, we may require additional capital from equity or debt financings to fund our operations, to respond to competitive pressures or strategic opportunities, or otherwise. We may not be able to secure timely additional financing on favorable terms, or at all. The terms of any additional financing may place limits on our financial and operating flexibility. If we raise additional funds through further issuances of equity, convertible debt securities or other securities convertible into equity, our existing stockholders could suffer dilution in their percentage ownership of us, and any new securities we issue could have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of holders of our common stock.
Contractual Obligations
The following is a summary of our contractual obligations as of December 29, 2012:
| Payments Due by Period | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Total | Less than 1 year |
1 - 3 years |
3 - 5 years |
More than 5 years |
||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchase obligations(1) |
$ | 52,667 | $ | 52,667 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | ||||||||||
| Operating leases(2) |
37,312 | 5,790 | 9,708 | 8,551 | 13,263 | |||||||||||||||
| Other contracts(3) |
6,947 | 6,947 | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Total contractual obligations(4) |
$ | 96,926 | $ | 65,404 | $ | 9,708 | $ | 8,551 | $ | 13,263 | ||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
44
Table of Contents
| (1) | We have service agreements with our major production suppliers under which we are committed to purchase certain parts. |
| (2) | We lease facilities under non-cancelable operating lease agreements. These leases have varying terms, predominantly no longer than ten years each and contain leasehold improvement incentives, rent holidays and escalation clauses that range from one to ten years. In addition, some of these leases have renewal options for up to five years. We also have contractual commitments to remove leasehold improvements and return certain properties to a specified condition when the leases terminate. At the inception of a lease with such conditions, we record an asset retirement obligation liability and a corresponding capital asset in an amount equal to the estimated fair value of the obligation. Leasehold improvements are amortized using the straight-line method over the shorter of the lease term or estimated useful life of the asset. An assumption of lease renewal where a renewal option exists is used only when the renewal has been determined to be reasonably assured. The estimated useful life of leasehold improvements is one to ten years. |
| (3) | Other contracts are related to contractual obligations for non-recurring engineering costs. |
| (4) | Tax liabilities of $1.8 million related to uncertain tax positions are not included in the table because we are unable to determine the timing of settlement if any, of these future payments with a reasonably reliable estimate. |
We had $3.6 million of standby letters of credit outstanding as of December 29, 2012. These consisted of $1.5 million related to a value added tax license, $1.4 million related to a customer proposal guarantee, $0.7 million related to property leases and $0.3 million related to foreign payroll. We had $2.7 million of standby letters of credit outstanding as of December 29, 2011. These consisted of $1.4 million related to a customer proposal guarantee, $0.8 million related to a value added tax license and $0.5 million related to property leases.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of December 29, 2012, we did not have 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.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”). These accounting principles require us to make certain estimates and judgments that can affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities as of the date of the consolidated financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the periods presented. Significant estimates and assumptions made by management include revenue recognition, stock-based compensation, inventory valuation, allowances for sales reserves, allowances for doubtful accounts, accrued warranty, cash equivalents, fair value measurement of investments, other-than-temporary impairments, derivative instruments and accounting for income taxes. By their nature, these estimates and judgments are subject to an inherent degree of uncertainty. We believe that the estimates and judgments upon which we rely are reasonable based upon information available to us at the time that these estimates and judgments are made. To the extent there are material differences between these estimates and actual results, our consolidated financial statements will be affected.
Revenue Recognition
Substantially all of our product sales are sold in combination with software support services comprised of either software warranty or software subscription services. We also periodically sell training, installation and deployment services, spares management and on-site hardware replacement services with our product sales. Training services include the right to a specified number of training classes and installation and deployment services may include customer site assessments, equipment installation and testing. Training and installation and deployment services are generally delivered over a 90-120 day period. Software warranty provides customers with maintenance releases and patches during the warranty support period. Software subscription also includes maintenance releases and patches and provides customers with rights to receive unspecified software product upgrades released during the support period. These support services are generally delivered over a one-year
45
Table of Contents
period. Spares management and on-site hardware replacement services include the replacement of defective units at customer sites in accordance with specified service level agreements and are generally delivered over a one-year period.
We recognize product revenue when all of the following have occurred: (1) we have entered into a legally binding arrangement with the customer; (2) delivery has occurred, which is when product title and risk of loss have transferred to the customer; (3) customer payment is deemed fixed or determinable; and (4) collectability is reasonably assured.
We allocate revenue to each element in our multiple-element arrangements based upon their relative selling prices. We determine the selling price for each deliverable based on a selling price hierarchy. The selling price for a deliverable is based on its VSOE if available, third party evidence (“TPE”) if VSOE is not available, or estimated selling price (“ESP”) if neither VSOE nor TPE is available. Revenue allocated to each element is then recognized when the basic revenue recognition criteria for that element has been met.
VSOE of selling price is used in the selling price allocation in all instances where it exists. VSOE of selling price for products and services is determined when a substantial majority of the selling prices fall within a reasonable range when sold separately. In certain instances, we are not able to establish VSOE for all deliverables in an arrangement with multiple elements. This mainly occurs where insufficient standalone sales transactions have occurred or where pricing for that element has not been consistent.
TPE of selling price can be established by evaluating largely interchangeable competitor products or services in standalone sales to similarly situated customers. As our products contain a significant element of proprietary technology and the solution offered differs substantially from that of competitors, it is typically difficult to obtain the reliable standalone competitive pricing necessary to establish TPE.
ESP represents the best estimate of the price at which we would transact a sale if the product or service was sold on a standalone basis. We determine ESP for a product or service by considering multiple factors including, but not limited to customer type, geography, market conditions, competitive landscape, gross margin objectives and pricing practices. The determination of ESP is made through formal approval by our management, taking into consideration the overall go-to-market pricing strategy.
As our go-to-market strategies evolve, we may modify our pricing practices in the future, which could result in changes in selling prices, including both VSOE and ESP. As a result, our future revenue recognition for multiple element arrangements could differ materially from that recorded in the current period. We regularly review VSOE, TPE, and ESP and maintain internal controls over the establishment and update of these inputs.
We limit the amount of revenue recognition for delivered elements to the amount that is not contingent on the future delivery of products or services, future performance obligations or subject to customer-specified return or refund privileges. We evaluate each deliverable in an arrangement to determine whether they represent separate units of accounting.
We have a limited number of software offerings which are not required to deliver the tangible product’s essential functionality and can be sold separately. Revenue from sales of these software products and related post-contract support will continue to be accounted for under software revenue recognition rules. Our multiple-element arrangements may therefore have a software deliverable that is subject to the existing software revenue recognition guidance. The revenue for these multiple-element arrangements is allocated to the software deliverable and the non-software deliverables based on the relative selling prices of all of the deliverables in the arrangement using the hierarchy in the new revenue recognition accounting guidance. Revenues related to these software offerings are not expected to be significant.
Revenue arrangements entered into prior to the first quarter of 2010 continue to be accounted for under our previous revenue recognition policy.
Services revenue includes software subscription services, training, installation and deployment services, spares management, on-site hardware replacement services and extended hardware warranty services. Revenue from
46
Table of Contents
software subscription, spares management, on-site hardware replacement services and extended hardware warranty contracts is deferred and is recognized ratably over the contractual support period, which is generally one year. Revenue related to training and installation and deployment services is recognized as the services are completed.
Contracts and customer purchase orders are generally used to determine the existence of an arrangement. In addition, shipping documents and customer acceptances, when applicable, are used to verify delivery and transfer of title. Revenue is recognized only when title and risk of loss pass to customers and when revenue recognition criteria has been met. In instances where acceptance of the product occurs upon formal written acceptance, revenue is deferred until such written acceptance has been received. We assess whether the fee is fixed or determinable based on the payment terms associated with the transaction. Payment terms to customers generally range from net 30 to 120 days from invoice, which are considered to be standard payment terms. However, payment terms greater than 120 days but less than or equal to one year from invoice may be considered standard if payment is supported by an irrevocable commercial letter of credit (“LOC”) issued by a creditworthy bank or if the LOC has been accepted and confirmed by a creditworthy bank. In the event payment terms are provided that differ from our standard business practices, the fees are deemed to not be fixed or determinable and, therefore, revenue is not recognized until the fees become fixed or determinable which we believe is when they are legally due and payable. We assess our ability to collect from our customers based primarily on the creditworthiness and past payment history of the customer.
For sales to resellers, the same revenue recognition criteria apply. It is our practice to identify an end-user prior to shipment to a reseller. We do not offer rights of return or price protection to our resellers.
Shipping charges billed to customers are included in product revenue and related shipping costs are included in product cost. We report revenue net of any required taxes collected from customers and remitted to government authorities, with the collected taxes recorded as current liabilities until remitted to the relevant government authority.
Stock-Based Compensation
Stock-based compensation cost is measured at the grant date based on the fair value of the award, and is recognized as expense over the requisite service period (generally the vesting period) under the straight-line amortization method.
We estimate the fair value of the stock options granted using the Black-Scholes option pricing formula and a single option award approach. For new-hire grants, options typically vest with respect to 25% of the shares one year after the option’s vesting commencement date and the remainder ratably on a monthly basis over three years, commencing one year after the vesting commencement date. For annual refresh grants, options typically vest ratably on a monthly basis over three, four or five years. In 2011, we granted performance-based stock options to executives as part of our annual refresh grant process. The performance-based stock options entitle our executive team to receive a number of options to purchase our common stock based on pre-established performance criteria over approximately one year. These performance metrics are classified as performance conditions, and we evaluate the performance status at the end of each period and record the expense when deemed probable. We make a number of estimates and assumptions in determining stock-based compensation related to options including the following:
| • | The expected forfeiture rate is estimated based on our historical forfeiture data and compensation costs are recognized only for those equity awards expected to vest. The estimation of the forfeiture rate requires judgment, and to the extent actual forfeitures differ from expectations, changes in estimate will be recorded as an adjustment in the period when such estimates are revised. Actual results may differ substantially from the estimates. |
| • | Expected volatility of our stock is based on the weighted-average implied and historical volatility of Infinera and our peer group. The peer group is comprised of similar companies in the same industrial sector. As we gain more historical volatility data, the weighting of our own data in the expected volatility calculation associated with options will gradually increase. |
We estimate the fair value of the rights to acquire stock under our ESPP using the Black-Scholes option pricing formula. Our ESPP typically provides for consecutive six-month offering periods and we use our own historical volatility data in the valuation of ESPP shares.
47
Table of Contents
We account for the fair value of restricted stock units (“RSUs”) using the closing market price of our common stock on the date of grant. For new-hire grants, RSUs typically vest ratably on an annual basis over four years. For annual refresh grants, RSUs typically vest ratably on an annual basis over three, four or five years. In 2009, we granted retention RSUs to executive officers which cliff vest after an approximate two-year period.
We grant performance share units (“PSUs”) with market conditions and estimate the fair value of using a Monte Carlo simulation model. We granted PSUs to our executives in 2009 as part of our annual refresh grant process. These PSUs entitle our executive officers and members of our board of directors to receive a number of shares of our common stock based on our stock price performance over a three-year or four-year period as compared to the NASDAQ Composite Index (“NASDAQ”) for the same period. The PSUs cliff vest after three or four years and the number of shares to be issued upon vesting ranges from 0.5 to 2.0 times the number of PSUs granted depending on the relative performance of our common stock price compared to NASDAQ. This performance metric is classified as a market condition.
The Monte Carlo simulation model is based on a discounted cash flow approach, with the simulation of a large number of possible stock price outcomes for our stock and NASDAQ. The use of the Monte Carlo simulation model requires the input of a number of assumptions including expected volatility of our stock price, expected volatility of NASDAQ, correlation between changes in our stock price and changes in NASDAQ, risk-free interest rate, and expected dividends. Expected volatility of our stock is based on the weighted-average implied and historical volatility of our peer group in the industry in which we do business. Expected volatility of NASDAQ is based on the historical and implied data. Correlation is based on the historical relationship between our peer group stock price and NASDAQ composite average. The risk-free interest rate is based upon the treasury zero-coupon yield appropriate for the term of the PSU as of the grant date. The expected dividend yield is zero for us as we do not expect to pay dividends in the future. The expected dividend yield for NASDAQ is the annual dividend yield expressed as a percentage of the composite average of NASDAQ on the grant date.
In 2012, we granted PSUs with performance conditions and estimated the fair value using the closing market price of our common stock on the date of grant. These PSUs entitle our executive officers to receive a number of shares of our common stock based on pre-established performance criteria over approximately two and a half years. The PSUs cliff vest at 50% upon achievement of specific revenue criteria and 50% will cliff vest upon achievement of specific operating profit criteria. This performance metric is classified as a performance condition.
Inventory Valuation
Inventories consist of raw materials, work-in-process and finished goods and are stated at standard cost adjusted to approximate the lower of actual cost (first-in, first-out method) or market. Market value is based upon an estimated selling price reduced by the estimated cost of disposal. The determination of market value involves numerous judgments including estimated average selling prices based upon recent sales volumes, industry trends, existing customer orders, current contract price, future demand and pricing and technological obsolescence of our products.
Inventory that is obsolete or in excess of our forecasted demand or is anticipated to be sold at a loss is written down to its estimated net realizable value based on historical usage and expected demand. As of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, our inventory value had been reduced by $6.9 million and $6.3 million, respectively, for excess and obsolescence. In valuing our deferred inventory costs, we considered whether the utility of the products delivered or expected to be delivered at less than cost, primarily comprised of common equipment, had declined. We concluded that, in the instances where the utility of the products delivered or expected to be delivered was less than cost, it was appropriate to value the inventory costs and deferred inventory costs at cost or market, whichever is lower, thereby recognizing the cost of the reduction in utility in the period in which the reduction occurred or can be reasonably estimated. We have, therefore, recognized inventory write-downs as necessary in each period in order to reflect inventory at the lower of cost or market (“LCM”). As of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, our inventory value had been reduced by $7.5 million and $7.3 million, respectively, for LCM adjustments.
We considered whether we should accrue losses on firm purchase commitments related to inventory items. Given that the expected selling price of common equipment in the future remains below-cost, we have also
48
Table of Contents
recorded losses on these firm purchase commitments in the period in which the commitment is made. When the inventory parts related to these firm purchase commitments are received, that inventory is recorded at the purchase price less the accrual for the loss on the purchase commitment.
If actual market conditions are less favorable than those projected by management, additional inventory write-downs may be required.
Accounts Receivable and Allowances for Doubtful Accounts
Accounts receivable consist of trade receivables recorded upon recognition of revenue for product and services revenues, reduced by reserves for estimated bad debts and returns. Trade accounts receivable are recorded at the invoiced amount and do not bear interest. Credit is extended based on evaluation of the customer’s financial condition. We record our accounts receivable at the invoiced value. We make judgments as to our ability to collect outstanding receivables and provide allowances for a portion of receivables when collection becomes doubtful. Provisions are made based upon a review of all significant outstanding invoices. At December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, our allowance for doubtful accounts was $0.1 million and zero, respectively.
Allowances for Sales Returns
Customer product returns are approved on a case by case basis. Specific reserve provisions are made based upon a specific review of all the approved product returns, where the customer has yet to return the products to generate the related sales return credit at the end of a period. Estimated sales returns are provided for as a reduction to revenue in 2009, 2010 and 2011. These were insignificant for any period presented on our consolidated financial statements. At December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, revenue reserves recorded for potential sales returns were $1.3 million and $0.2 million, respectively.
Accrued Warranty
We warrant that our products will operate substantially in conformity with product specifications. Upon delivery of our products, we provide for the estimated cost to repair or replace products or the related components that may be returned under warranty. Our hardware warranty periods range from one to five years from date of acceptance for hardware and 90 days for software warranty. The hardware warranty accrual is based on actual historical returns experience and the application of those historical return rates to our in-warranty installed base. We periodically assess the adequacy of our recorded warranty liabilities and adjust the amounts as necessary. We have software warranty support obligations to a small number of our customers and the costs associated with providing these software warranties have been insignificant to our consolidated financial statements to date.
Cash, Cash Equivalents and Short-term and Long-term Investments
We consider all highly liquid instruments with an original maturity at the date of purchase of 90 days or less to be cash equivalents. We maintain our cash in bank deposit accounts which, at times, may exceed federally insured limits. We have not experienced any losses in such accounts.
Marketable securities consist of certificates of deposit, commercial paper, corporate bonds, U.S. agency notes, U.S. treasuries and ARS. We consider all debt instruments with original maturities at the date of purchase greater than 90 days and remaining time to maturity of one year or less to be short-term investments. We classify debt instruments with remaining maturities greater than one year as long-term investments, unless we intend to settle our holdings within one year or less and in such case it is considered to be short-term investments. We determine the appropriate classification of our marketable securities at the time of purchase and re-evaluate such designations as of each balance sheet date.
Available-for-sale investments are stated at fair market value with unrealized gains and losses recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and Other income (expense), net in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. We evaluate our available-for-sale marketable debt securities for other-than-temporary impairments as discussed below and record any credit
49
Table of Contents
loss portion in Other income (expense), net in our consolidated statements of operations. The amortized cost of debt securities is adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity and for any credit losses incurred on these securities. Gains and losses are recognized when realized in the consolidated statements of operations under the specific identification method. Trading securities investments are stated at fair value with unrealized gains and losses reported in Other income (expense), net in the consolidated statements of operations, consisting of ARS trading securities and related put rights.
Fair Value Measurement of Investments
Pursuant to the accounting guidance for fair value measurements and its subsequent updates, fair value is defined as the price that would be received from selling an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. When determining the fair value measurements for assets and liabilities required or permitted to be recorded at fair value, we consider the principal or most advantageous market in which it would transact and it considers assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability.
Valuation techniques used by us are based upon observable and unobservable inputs. Observable or market inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect our assumptions about market participant assumptions based on best information available. Observable inputs are the preferred source of values. These two types of inputs create the following fair value hierarchy:
| Level 1 – |
Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. | |
| 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-based valuation techniques for which all significant assumptions are observable in the market or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. | |
| Level 3 – |
Prices or valuations that require management inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable. | |
We measure our cash equivalents, derivative instruments and debt securities at fair value and classify our securities in accordance with the fair value hierarchy. Our money market funds and U.S. treasuries are classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy and are valued based on quoted prices in active markets for identical securities.
We classify our certificates of deposit, commercial paper, corporate bonds, U.S. agency notes and foreign currency exchange forward contracts within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy as follows:
Certificates of Deposit
We review market pricing and other observable market inputs for the same or similar securities obtained from a number of industry standard data providers. In the event that a transaction is observed for the same or similar security in the marketplace, the price on that transaction reflects the market price and fair value on that day. In the absence of any observable market transactions for a particular security, the fair market value at period end would be equal to the par value. These inputs represent quoted prices for similar assets or these inputs have been derived from observable market data, and result in the classification of these securities as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
Commercial Paper
We review market pricing and other observable market inputs for the same or similar securities obtained from a number of industry standard data providers. In the event that a transaction is observed for the same or similar security in the marketplace, the price on that transaction reflects the market price and fair value on that day and then follows a revised accretion schedule to determine the fair market value at period end. In the absence of any observable market transactions for a particular security, the fair market value at period end is derived by accreting from the last observable market price. These inputs represent quoted prices for similar assets or these inputs have been derived from observable market data accreted mathematically to par, and result in the classification of these securities as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
50
Table of Contents
Corporate Bonds
We review trading activity and pricing for each of the corporate bond securities in its portfolio as of the measurement date and determines if pricing data of sufficient frequency and volume in an active market exists in order to support Level 1 classification of these securities. Since sufficient quoted pricing for identical securities is not available, we obtain market pricing and other observable market inputs for similar securities from a number of industry standard data providers. In instances where multiple prices exist for similar securities, these prices are used as inputs into a distribution-curve to determine the fair market value at period end. As a result, we classify our corporate bonds as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
Foreign Currency Exchange Forward Contracts
As discussed in Note 5, “Derivative Instruments,” to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, we mainly hold non-speculative foreign exchange forward contracts to hedge certain foreign currency exchange exposures. We estimate the fair values of derivatives based on quoted market prices or pricing models using current market rates. Where applicable, these models project future cash flows and discount the future amounts to a present value using market-based observable inputs including interest rate curves, credit risk, foreign exchange rates, and forward and spot prices for currencies. As a result, we classify our derivative instruments as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
We classify our ARS within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.
Our ARS are classified within Level 3 because they are valued, in part, by using inputs that are unobservable in the market and are significant to the valuation. These ARS represent approximately 2% of our total investment portfolio as of December 29, 2012. Uncertainties in the credit markets have affected all of our ARS and auctions for these securities have failed to settle on their respective settlement dates. In light of these developments, to determine the fair value for our ARS, we used a combination of the market approach and income approach. The market approach uses pricing based on transactions in an inactive secondary market for similar or comparable securities. In addition, we performed our own discounted cash flow analysis. Management determined that it was most appropriate to value the ARS using the market approach and income approach equally given the facts and circumstances as of December 29, 2012, and therefore incorporated both valuations in our fair value measurement.
The significant unobservable inputs and assumptions used in the discounted cash flow model to determine the fair value of our ARS, as of December 29, 2012, are as follows:
| • | Contractual cash flow |
The model assumed that the principal amount or par value for these securities will be repaid at the end of the estimated workout period. In addition, future interest payments were estimated as described in each individual prospectus and based on the then-current U.S. Treasury Bill rate adjusted for a failed auction premium of 150 basis points (“bps”).
| • | ARS discount rate |
The model incorporated a discount rate equal to an estimate of the LIBOR rates commensurate with the estimated workout period of the securities. As of the measurement date, these rates were then adjusted by a factor that ranged from 204 bps, representing an estimate of the market student loan spread and a discount factor to reflect the lack of liquidity and credit risk associated with these securities. As of December 29, 2012, we held $3.1 million (par value) of A3 rated securities. Our ARS are mostly collateralized by student loans guaranteed by the U.S. government under the Federal Family Education Loan Program. The discount rate does, however, include a discount factor to reflect the issuer’s credit risk and its potential inability to perform its obligations under the terms of the ARS agreements. Our valuation analysis indicates that the estimated credit risk element included in the discount rate was 209 bps.
| • | Estimated maturity |
We estimated the workout period of our ARS as the weighted-average life of the underlying trust loan portfolio where this information was available from servicing and other trust reports. In a small number of instances where this information was not available, we used the weighted-average life of the loan portfolio of a similar trust. The estimated time to maturity of the securities as of the measurement date was 6.7 years.
51
Table of Contents
Other-Than-Temporary Impairments
We review our available-for-sale marketable debt securities on a regular basis to evaluate whether or not a security has experienced an other-than-temporary decline in fair value. If a debt security’s market value is below amortized cost and we either intend to sell the security or it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security before our anticipated recovery, we record an OTTI charge to earnings for the entire amount of the impairment.
When we do not intend to sell an impaired security and it is not more likely than not that we will be required to sell prior to recovery of its amortized cost basis, we separate the OTTI into credit and non-credit loss portions. The amount representing the credit loss is recognized in Other income (expense), net, and the amount related to all other factors is recognized in Accumulated other comprehensive loss.
In determining if a credit loss has occurred, it is our policy to isolate the credit loss related portion of the discount rate used to derive the fair market value of the security and apply this to the expected cash flows in order to determine the portion of the OTTI that is credit loss related. This credit related portion of the discount rate is based on the financial condition of the issuer, changes in rating agency credit ratings for the security or increases in credit related yield spreads on similar securities offered by the same issuer.
Once a credit impairment loss has been recognized in our consolidated statements of operations, the amortized cost basis of that available-for-sale security is reduced by the amount of the credit impairment loss, resulting in a new cost basis for the security. Any non-credit related unrealized gains and losses are recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive loss in our consolidated balance sheets. We will continue to monitor the security’s credit rating and credit spread and will accrete any reduction in the credit impairment loss to interest income over the expected life of the security.
Derivative Instruments
As discussed in Note 5, “Derivative Instruments,” to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, we mainly hold non-speculative foreign exchange forward contracts to hedge certain foreign currency exchange exposures. We estimate the fair values of derivatives based on quoted market prices or pricing models using current market rates. Where applicable, these models project future cash flows and discount the future amounts to a present value using market-based observable inputs including interest rate curves, credit risk, foreign exchange rates, and forward and spot prices for currencies. As a result, we classify our derivative instruments as Level II of the fair value hierarchy.
Accounting for Income Taxes
As part of the process of preparing our consolidated financial statements, we are required to estimate our taxes in each of the jurisdictions in which we operate. We estimate actual current tax expense together with assessing temporary differences resulting from different treatment of items, such as accruals and allowances not currently deductible for tax purposes. These differences result in deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are included in our consolidated balance sheets. In general, deferred tax assets represent future tax benefits to be received when certain expenses previously recognized in our consolidated statements of operations become deductible expenses under applicable income tax laws or loss or credit carryforwards are utilized. Accordingly, realization of our deferred tax assets is dependent on future taxable income within the respective jurisdictions against which these deductions, losses and credits can be utilized within the applicable future periods.
We must assess the likelihood that some portion or all of our deferred tax assets will be recovered from future taxable income within the respective jurisdictions, and to the extent we believe that recovery does not meet the “more-likely-than-not” standard, we must establish a valuation allowance. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. Management judgment is required in determining our provision for income taxes, our deferred tax assets and liabilities and any valuation allowance recorded against our net deferred tax assets. At December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, our domestic net deferred tax assets were fully reserved with a valuation allowance because, based on the available evidence, we believed at that time it was more likely than not
52
Table of Contents
that we would not be able to utilize those deferred tax assets in the future. We intend to maintain a valuation allowance until sufficient evidence exists to support the reversal of the valuation allowance. We make estimates and judgments about our future taxable income, by jurisdiction, based on assumptions that are consistent with our plans and estimates. Should the actual amounts differ from our estimates, the amount of our valuation allowance could be materially impacted.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
See Note 2, “Significant Accounting Policies,” to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a full description of recent accounting pronouncements including the respective expected dates of adoptions and effects on us.
| ITEM 7A. | QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK |
Foreign Currency Risk
A majority of our revenue, expense and capital purchasing activities are transacted in U.S. dollars. However, we do incur some insignificant operating costs in other currencies. In addition, certain of our sales contracts are priced in Euros and, therefore, a portion of our revenue is subject to foreign currency risks. Our operating expenses and cash flows are subject to fluctuations due to changes in foreign currency exchange rates, particularly changes in the India Rupee, Chinese Yuan, British pound and the Euro.
The effect of an immediate 10% adverse change in exchange rates on foreign denominated transactions as of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011 would result in a loss of approximately $2.3 million and $1.0 million, respectively for the year then ended. Beginning in the second quarter of 2009, we established a foreign currency risk management program to help protect against the impact of foreign currency exchange rate movements on our operating results. We enter into foreign currency exchange forward contracts to reduce the impact of foreign currency fluctuations on accounts receivable denominated in currencies other than our functional currency, which is the U.S. dollar. As a result, we do not expect a significant impact to our results from a change in exchange rates on foreign denominated accounts receivable balances in the near-term. Fluctuations in our currency exchange rates could impact our business in the future.
Interest Rate Sensitivity
We had cash and cash equivalents, short-term and long-term investments and short-term and long-term restricted cash totaling $187.6 million and $253.1 million as of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. As of December 29, 2012, we invested in certificates of deposit, money market funds, commercial paper, corporate bonds, U.S. treasuries and ARS. The unrestricted cash and cash equivalents are held for working capital purposes. We do not enter into investments for speculative purposes. We believe that we do not have any material exposure to changes in the fair value as a result of changes in interest rates. Declines in interest rates, however, will reduce future investment income. If overall interest rates fell by 10% in 2012 and 2011, our interest income would have declined approximately $0.1 million and $0.1 million for such years, assuming consistent investment levels.
As of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, we had no debt outstanding.
Auction Rate Securities
As of December 29, 2012, we held an A3 rated available-for-sale ARS of $3.1 million (par value) with a fair value of $2.9 million with one issuer. This ARS has a contractual maturity term of up to 33.0 years and it is not clear when we will be able to liquidate this investment. In 2009, we determined that the present value of the expected cash flows for this security was below its par value, and recorded an initial OTTI of $2.7 million, equal to the difference between the fair value and the par value had occurred. During 2012, $0.2 million of this A3 rated ARS was called at par value.
Failed auctions resulted in a lack of liquidity in the ARS but do not affect the underlying collateral of the securities. We do not anticipate that any potential lack of liquidity in our ARS, even for an extended period of time,
53
Table of Contents
will affect our ability to finance our operations, including our continued investments in research and development and planned capital expenditures. We continue to monitor efforts by the financial markets to find alternative means for restoring the liquidity of these investments. Our ARS investment is classified as a non-current asset until we have better visibility as to when its liquidity will be restored.
See Note 3, “Fair Value Measurements and Other-Than-Temporary Impairment,” to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.
54
Table of Contents
| ITEM 8. | FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA |
INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
| Page | ||||
| Reports of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
56 | |||
| 58 | ||||
| 59 | ||||
| 60 | ||||
| 61 | ||||
| 63 | ||||
| 64 | ||||
55
Table of Contents
Report of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Infinera Corporation
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Infinera Corporation as of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 29, 2012. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule listed in the Index at Item 15. These financial statements and schedule are the responsibility of the Company’s 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 Infinera Corporation at December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 29, 2012, 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, present 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), Infinera Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 29, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated March 5, 2013 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
San Jose, California
March 5, 2013
56
Table of Contents
Report of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Infinera Corporation
We have audited Infinera Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 29, 2012, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria). Infinera Corporation’s 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 Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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 company’s 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.
In our opinion, Infinera Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 29, 2012, 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 Infinera Corporation as of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 29, 2012 of Infinera Corporation and our report dated March 5, 2013 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
San Jose, California
March 5, 2013
57
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
(In thousands, except par values)
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
|||||||
| ASSETS |
||||||||
| Current assets: |
||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents |
$ | 104,666 | $ | 94,458 | ||||
| Short-term investments |
76,146 | 101,296 | ||||||
| Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $94 in 2012 and $0 in 2011 |
107,039 | 80,616 | ||||||
| Other receivables |
2,909 | 1,346 | ||||||
| Inventory |
127,809 | 88,996 | ||||||
| Deferred inventory costs |
1,029 | 5,987 | ||||||
| Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
9,899 | 10,532 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total current assets |
429,497 | 383,231 | ||||||
| Property, plant and equipment, net |
80,343 | 76,753 | ||||||
| Deferred inventory costs, non-current |
100 | 1,020 | ||||||
| Long-term investments |
2,874 | 54,315 | ||||||
| Cost-method investment |
9,000 | 9,000 | ||||||
| Long-term restricted cash |
3,868 | 3,047 | ||||||
| Deferred tax asset |
805 | 822 | ||||||
| Other non-current assets |
1,683 | 3,516 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total assets |
$ | 528,170 | $ | 531,704 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY |
||||||||
| Current liabilities: |
||||||||
| Accounts payable |
$ | 61,428 | $ | 48,838 | ||||
| Accrued expenses |
25,483 | 22,421 | ||||||
| Accrued compensation and related benefits |
22,325 | 18,966 | ||||||
| Accrued warranty |
7,262 | 5,692 | ||||||
| Deferred revenue |
26,744 | 22,781 | ||||||
| Deferred tax liability |
805 | 767 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total current liabilities |
144,047 | 119,465 | ||||||
| Accrued warranty, non-current |
9,220 | 7,173 | ||||||
| Deferred revenue, non-current |
3,210 | 3,410 | ||||||
| Other long-term liabilities |
15,557 | 13,853 | ||||||
| Commitments and contingencies (Note 10) |
||||||||
| Stockholders‘ equity: |
||||||||
| Preferred stock, $0.001 par value |
0 | 0 | ||||||
| Common stock, $0.001 par value |
112 | 107 | ||||||
| Additional paid-in capital |
930,618 | 876,927 | ||||||
| Accumulated other comprehensive loss |
(2,228 | ) | (2,195 | ) | ||||
| Accumulated deficit |
(572,366 | ) | (487,036 | ) | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total stockholders‘ equity |
356,136 | 387,803 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity |
$ | 528,170 | $ | 531,704 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
58
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In thousands, except per share data)
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Revenue: |
||||||||||||
| Product |
$ | 378,138 | $ | 349,468 | $ | 401,578 | ||||||
| Ratable product and related support and services |
1,897 | 3,176 | 6,155 | |||||||||
| Services |
58,402 | 52,233 | 46,619 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total revenue |
438,437 | 404,877 | 454,352 | |||||||||
| Cost of revenue: |
||||||||||||
| Cost of product |
258,874 | 219,710 | 225,183 | |||||||||
| Cost of ratable product and related support and services |
563 | 1,096 | 3,217 | |||||||||
| Cost of services |
21,431 | 18,580 | 19,945 | |||||||||
| Restructuring and other costs (credit) related to cost of revenue |
0 | 0 | (182 | ) | ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total cost of revenue |
280,868 | 239,386 | 248,163 | |||||||||
| Gross profit |
157,569 | 165,491 | 206,189 | |||||||||
| Operating expenses: |
||||||||||||
| Research and development |
117,233 | 127,120 | 118,518 | |||||||||
| Sales and marketing |
75,862 | 64,773 | 58,103 | |||||||||
| General and administrative |
47,475 | 54,375 | 58,098 | |||||||||
| Restructuring and other costs (credit) |
0 | (129 | ) | 159 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total operating expenses |
240,570 | 246,139 | 234,878 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Loss from operations |
(83,001 | ) | (80,648 | ) | (28,689 | ) | ||||||
| Other income (expense), net: |
||||||||||||
| Interest income |
911 | 1,014 | 1,390 | |||||||||
| Other gain (loss), net |
(1,050 | ) | (419 | ) | (316 | ) | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total other income (expense), net |
(139 | ) | 595 | 1,074 | ||||||||
| Loss before income taxes |
(83,140 | ) | (80,053 | ) | (27,615 | ) | ||||||
| Provision for income taxes |
2,190 | 1,691 | 317 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Net loss |
$ | (85,330 | ) | $ | (81,744 | ) | $ | (27,932 | ) | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Net loss per common share: |
||||||||||||
| Basic |
$ | (0.77 | ) | $ | (0.78 | ) | $ | (0.28 | ) | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Diluted |
$ | (0.77 | ) | $ | (0.78 | ) | $ | (0.28 | ) | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Weighted average shares used in computing net loss per common share: |
||||||||||||
| Basic |
110,739 | 105,432 | 99,380 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Diluted |
110,739 | 105,432 | 99,380 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
59
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
(In thousands)
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Net loss |
$ | (85,330 | ) | $ | (81,744 | ) | $ | (27,932 | ) | |||
| Other comprehensive loss: |
||||||||||||
| Unrealized gain (loss) on auction rate securities classified as available-for-sale investments |
(141 | ) | 410 | 820 | ||||||||
| Unrealized gain (loss) on all other available-for-sale investments |
158 | (105 | ) | (30 | ) | |||||||
| Foreign currency translation adjustment |
(43 | ) | (1,117 | ) | 75 | |||||||
| Tax effect on items related to available-for-sale investment |
(7 | ) | (122 | ) | (316 | ) | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Net change in accumulated other comprehensive loss |
(33 | ) | (934 | ) | 549 | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Comprehensive loss
|
$ | (85,363 | ) | $ | (82,678 | ) | $ | (27,383 | ) | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
60
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 25, 2010, December 31, 2011 and December 29, 2012
(In thousands, except per share data)
| Common Stock | Additional Paid-in Capital |
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss |
Accumulated Deficit |
Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Shares | Amount | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Balance at December 26, 2009 |
96,874 | $ | 97 | $ | 747,580 | $ | (1,810 | ) | $ | (377,360 | ) | $ | 368,507 | |||||||||||||
| Stock options exercised |
3,094 | 3 | 11,847 | 0 | 0 | 11,850 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ESPP shares purchased |
1,205 | 1 | 7,561 | 0 | 0 | 7,562 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Common stock repurchased |
(3 | ) | 0 | (14 | ) | 0 | 0 | (14 | ) | |||||||||||||||||
| Reclassification of options exercised but not vested |
0 | 0 | 200 | 0 | 0 | 200 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Restricted stock units released |
1,322 | 1 | (13 | ) | 0 | 0 | (12 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Stock-based compensation |
0 | 0 | 50,039 | 0 | 0 | 50,039 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Comprehensive loss: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Unrealized gain on auction rate securities classified as available-for-sale investments |
0 | 0 | 0 | 820 | 0 | 820 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Unrealized gain on all other available-for-sale investments |
0 | 0 | 0 | (30 | ) | 0 | (30 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Foreign currency translation adjustment |
0 | 0 | 0 | 75 | 0 | 75 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Tax effect on items related to available-for-sale investment |
0 | 0 | 0 | (316 | ) | 0 | (316 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net loss |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | (27,932 | ) | (27,932 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total comprehensive loss |
(27,383 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
| Balance at December 25, 2010 |
102,492 | $ | 102 | $ | 817,200 | $ | (1,261 | ) | $ | (405,292 | ) | $ | 410,749 | |||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
| Stock options exercised |
378 | 1 | 1,449 | 0 | 0 | 1,450 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ESPP shares purchased |
1,309 | 1 | 8,461 | 0 | 0 | 8,462 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Common stock repurchased |
(140 | ) | 0 | (1,248 | ) | 0 | 0 | (1,248 | ) | |||||||||||||||||
| Reclassification of options exercised but not vested |
0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Restricted stock units released |
2,937 | 3 | (3 | ) | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Stock-based compensation |
0 | 0 | 51,067 | 0 | 0 | 51,067 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Comprehensive loss: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Unrealized gain on auction rate securities classified as available-for-sale investments |
0 | 0 | 0 | 410 | 0 | 410 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Unrealized gain on all other available-for-sale investments |
0 | 0 | 0 | (105 | ) | 0 | (105 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Foreign currency translation adjustment |
0 | 0 | 0 | (1,117 | ) | 0 | (1,117 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Tax effect on items related to available-for-sale investment |
0 | 0 | 0 | (122 | ) | 0 | (122 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net loss |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | (81,744 | ) | (81,744 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Total comprehensive loss |
(82,678 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
| Balance at December 31, 2011 |
106,976 | $ | 107 | $ | 876,927 | $ | (2,195 | ) | $ | (487,036 | ) | $ | 387,803 | |||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
61
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
For the Years Ended December 25, 2010, December 31, 2011 and December 29, 2012—
(Continued)
(In thousands, except per share data)
| Common Stock | Additional Paid-in Capital |
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss |
Accumulated Deficit |
Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Shares | Amount | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Balance at December 31, 2011 |
106,976 | $ | 107 | $ | 876,927 | $ | (2,195 | ) | $ | (487,036 | ) | $ | 387,803 | |||||||||||||
| Stock options exercised |
582 | 1 | 2,552 | 0 | 0 | 2,553 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ESPP shares purchased |
1,653 | 1 | 9,029 | 0 | 0 | 9,030 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Common stock repurchased |
(128 | ) | 0 | (882 | ) | 0 | 0 | (882 | ) | |||||||||||||||||
| Reclassification of options exercised but not vested |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Restricted stock units released |
3,378 | 3 | (3 | ) | 0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Stock-based compensation |
0 | 0 | 42,995 | 0 | 0 | 42,995 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Comprehensive loss: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Unrealized gain on auction rate securities classified as available-for-sale investments |
0 | 0 | 0 | (141 | ) | 0 | (141 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Unrealized gain on all other available-for-sale investments |
0 | 0 | 0 | 158 | 0 | 158 | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Foreign currency translation adjustment |
0 | 0 | 0 | (43 | ) | 0 | (43 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Tax effect on items related to available-for-sale investment |
0 | 0 | 0 | (7 | ) | 0 | (7 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Net loss |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | (85,330 | ) | (85,330 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
| Total comprehensive loss |
(85,363 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
| Balance at December 29, 2012 |
112,461 | $ | 112 | $ | 930,618 | $ | (2,228 | ) | $ | (572,366 | ) | $ | 356,136 | |||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
62
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Cash Flows from Operating Activities: |
||||||||||||
| Net loss |
$ | (85,330 | ) | $ | (81,744 | ) | $ | (27,932 | ) | |||
| Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities: |
||||||||||||
| Depreciation and amortization |
23,661 | 17,859 | 15,619 | |||||||||
| Non-cash restructuring and other costs (credit) |
0 | (129 | ) | 100 | ||||||||
| Provision for other receivables |
0 | 563 | 0 | |||||||||
| Provision for doubtful accounts |
94 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||
| Amortization of premium on investments |
2,068 | 4,215 | 3,761 | |||||||||
| Stock-based compensation expense |
41,819 | 50,157 | 50,335 | |||||||||
| Unrealized loss on Put Rights |
0 | 0 | 1,696 | |||||||||
| Unrealized holding gain for trading securities |
0 | 0 | (1,696 | ) | ||||||||
| Non-cash tax benefit |
(7 | ) | (95 | ) | (316 | ) | ||||||
| Other gain |
(475 | ) | (335 | ) | (275 | ) | ||||||
| Changes in assets and liabilities: |
||||||||||||
| Accounts receivable |
(26,517 | ) | (4,686 | ) | (6,448 | ) | ||||||
| Other receivables |
(1,894 | ) | 3,440 | (307 | ) | |||||||
| Inventory |
(40,623 | ) | (6,007 | ) | (13,143 | ) | ||||||
| Prepaid expenses and other assets |
2,293 | 12,695 | (2,640 | ) | ||||||||
| Deferred inventory costs |
5,741 | 1,999 | 928 | |||||||||
| Accounts payable |
15,410 | 9,342 | 1,161 | |||||||||
| Accrued liabilities and other expenses |
6,915 | (10,282 | ) | 9,196 | ||||||||
| Deferred revenue |
3,763 | (401 | ) | 216 | ||||||||
| Accrued warranty |
3,616 | 1,444 | 282 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |
(49,466 | ) | (1,965 | ) | 30,537 | |||||||
| Cash Flows from Investing Activities: |
||||||||||||
| Purchase of available-for-sale investments |
(54,150 | ) | (273,334 | ) | (253,130 | ) | ||||||
| Purchase of cost-method investment |
0 | (4,500 | ) | (4,500 | ) | |||||||
| Proceeds from sales of available-for-sale investments |
11,584 | 4,072 | 0 | |||||||||
| Proceeds from maturities and calls of investments, and exercise of Put Rights |
117,605 | 287,781 | 232,333 | |||||||||
| Proceeds from disposal of assets |
1 | 262 | 324 | |||||||||
| Purchase of property and equipment |
(25,395 | ) | (39,382 | ) | (20,672 | ) | ||||||
| Advance to secure manufacturing capacity |
0 | (1,500 | ) | 0 | ||||||||
| Reimbursement of manufacturing capacity advance |
50 | 450 | 0 | |||||||||
| Change in restricted cash |
(827 | ) | 983 | (77 | ) | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
48,868 | (25,168 | ) | (45,722 | ) | |||||||
| Cash Flows from Financing Activities: |
||||||||||||
| Proceeds from issuance of common stock |
11,580 | 10,023 | 19,348 | |||||||||
| Repurchase of common stock |
(882 | ) | (1,248 | ) | (14 | ) | ||||||
| Payments for purchase of assets under financing arrangement |
0 | (262 | ) | (349 | ) | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Net cash provided by financing activities |
10,698 | 8,513 | 18,985 | |||||||||
| Effect of exchange rate changes on cash |
108 | (571 | ) | (10 | ) | |||||||
| Net change in cash and cash equivalents |
10,208 | (19,191 | ) | 3,790 | ||||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
94,458 | 113,649 | 109,859 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
$ | 104,666 | $ | 94,458 | $ | 113,649 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information: |
||||||||||||
| Cash paid for income taxes |
$ | 923 | $ | 1,487 | $ | 739 | ||||||
| Supplemental schedule of non-cash financing activities |
||||||||||||
| Non-cash settlement for manufacturing capacity advance |
$ | 275 | $ | 0 |
$ |
0 |
| |||||
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
63
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
| 1. | Organization and Basis of Presentation |
Infinera Corporation (“Infinera” or the “Company”), headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, was founded in December 2000 and incorporated in the State of Delaware. Infinera specializes in Digital Optical Networking systems that are designed to continually improve the economics of optical networking by combining the speed of optics with the simplicity of digital. Infinera is unique in its use of breakthrough semiconductor technology: Large Scale Photonic Integrated Circuit (PIC). Infinera’s systems leverage PIC technology to provide customers with a service-ready architecture that enables faster time-to-revenue and greater profitability through network efficiency and the ability to rapidly deliver differentiated services without reengineering their optical infrastructure.
The Company operates and reports financial results on a fiscal year of 52 or 53 weeks ending on the last Saturday of December in each year. Accordingly, fiscal year 2012 was a 52-week year that ended on December 29, 2012. Fiscal years 2011 and 2010 were a 53-week and 52-week years that ended on December 31, 2011 and December 25, 2010, respectively. The next 53-week year will end on December 31, 2016.
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. All intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated. The Company reclassified certain amounts reported in previous periods to conform to the current presentation.
| 2. | Significant Accounting Policies |
Use of Estimates
The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”). These accounting principles require the Company to make certain estimates, assumptions and judgments that can affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the consolidated financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the periods presented. Significant estimates, assumptions and judgments made by management include revenue recognition, stock-based compensation, inventory valuation, allowances for sales returns, allowances for doubtful accounts, accrued warranty, cash equivalents, fair value measurement of investments, other-than-temporary impairments, derivative instruments and accounting for income taxes. Management believes that the estimates and judgments upon which they rely are reasonable based upon information available to them at the time that these estimates and judgments are made. To the extent there are material differences between these estimates and actual results, the Company’s consolidated financial statements will be affected.
Revenue Recognition
Substantially all of the Company’s product sales are sold in combination with software support services comprised of either software warranty or software subscription services. The Company also periodically sells training, installation and deployment services, spares management and on-site hardware replacement services with its product sales. Training services include the right to a specified number of training classes and installation and deployment services may include customer site assessments, equipment installation and testing. Training and installation and deployment services are generally delivered over a 90-120 day period. Software warranty provides customers with maintenance releases and patches during the warranty support period. Software subscription also includes maintenance releases and patches and provides customers with rights to receive unspecified software product upgrades released during the support period. These support services are generally delivered over a one-year period. Spares management and on-site hardware replacement services include the replacement of defective units at customer sites in accordance with specified service level agreements and are generally delivered over a one-year period.
The Company recognizes product revenue when all of the following have occurred: (1) it has entered into a legally binding arrangement with the customer; (2) delivery has occurred, which is when product title and risk of loss have transferred to the customer; (3) customer payment is deemed fixed or determinable; and (4) collectability is reasonably assured.
64
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
The Company allocates revenue to each element in its multiple-element arrangements based upon their relative selling prices. The Company determines the selling price for each deliverable based on a selling price hierarchy. The selling price for a deliverable is based on its vendor specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) if available, third party evidence (“TPE”) if VSOE is not available, or estimated selling price (“ESP”) if neither VSOE nor TPE is available. Revenue allocated to each element is then recognized when the basic revenue recognition criteria for that element has been met.
VSOE of selling price is used in the selling price allocation in all instances where it exists. VSOE of selling price for products and services is determined when a substantial majority of the selling prices fall within a reasonable range when sold separately. In certain instances, the Company is not able to establish VSOE for all deliverables in an arrangement with multiple elements. This mainly occurs where insufficient standalone sales transactions have occurred or where pricing for that element has not been consistent.
TPE of selling price can be established by evaluating largely interchangeable competitor products or services in standalone sales to similarly situated customers. As the Company’s products contain a significant element of proprietary technology and the solution offered differs substantially from that of competitors, it is typically difficult to obtain the reliable standalone competitive pricing necessary to establish TPE.
ESP represents the best estimate of the price at which the Company would transact a sale if the product or service was sold on a standalone basis. The Company determines ESP for a product or service by considering multiple factors including, but not limited to customer type, geography, market conditions, competitive landscape, gross margin objectives and pricing practices. The determination of ESP is made through formal approval by the Company’s management, taking into consideration the overall go-to-market pricing strategy.
As the Company’s go-to-market strategies evolve, the Company may modify its pricing practices in the future, which could result in changes in selling prices, including both VSOE and ESP. As a result, the Company’s future revenue recognition for multiple element arrangements could differ materially from that recorded in the current period. The Company regularly reviews VSOE, TPE and ESP and maintains internal controls over the establishment and update of these inputs.
The Company limits the amount of revenue recognition for delivered elements to the amount that is not contingent on the future delivery of products or services, future performance obligations or subject to customer-specified return or refund privileges. The Company evaluates each deliverable in an arrangement to determine whether they represent separate units of accounting.
The Company has a limited number of software offerings which are not required to deliver the tangible product’s essential functionality and can be sold separately. Revenue from sales of these software products and related post-contract support will continue to be accounted for under software revenue recognition rules. The Company’s multiple-element arrangements may therefore have a software deliverable that is subject to the existing software revenue recognition guidance. The revenue for these multiple-element arrangements is allocated to the software deliverable and the non-software deliverables based on the relative selling prices of all of the deliverables in the arrangement using the hierarchy in the new revenue recognition accounting guidance. Revenues related to these software offerings are not expected to be significant.
Revenue arrangements entered into prior to the first quarter of 2010 continue to be accounted for under the Company’s previous revenue recognition policy.
Services revenue includes software subscription services, training, installation and deployment services, spares management, on-site hardware replacement services and extended hardware warranty services. Revenue from software subscription, spares management, on-site hardware replacement services and extended hardware warranty contracts is deferred and is recognized ratably over the contractual support period, which is generally one year. Revenue related to training and installation and deployment services is recognized as the services are completed.
65
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Contracts and customer purchase orders are generally used to determine the existence of an arrangement. In addition, shipping documents and customer acceptances, when applicable, are used to verify delivery and transfer of title. Revenue is recognized only when title and risk of loss pass to customers and when revenue recognition criteria has been met. In instances where acceptance of the product occurs upon formal written acceptance, revenue is deferred until such written acceptance has been received. The Company assesses whether the fee is fixed or determinable based on the payment terms associated with the transaction. Payment terms to customers generally range from net 30 to 120 days from invoice, which are considered to be standard payment terms. However, payment terms greater than 120 days but less than or equal to one year from invoice may be considered standard if payment is supported by an irrevocable commercial letter of credit (“LOC”) issued by a creditworthy bank or the LOC has been accepted and confirmed by a creditworthy bank. In the event payment terms are provided that differ from the Company’s standard business practices, the fees are deemed to not be fixed or determinable and, therefore, revenue is not recognized until the fees become fixed or determinable which the Company believes is when they are legally due and payable. The Company assesses its ability to collect from its customers based primarily on the creditworthiness and past payment history of the customer.
For sales to resellers, the same revenue recognition criteria apply. It is the Company’s practice to identify an end-user prior to shipment to a reseller. The Company does not offer rights of return or price protection to its resellers.
Shipping charges billed to customers are included in product revenue and related shipping costs are included in product cost. The Company reports revenue net of any required taxes collected from customers and remitted to government authorities, with the collected taxes recorded as current liabilities until remitted to the relevant government authority.
Stock-Based Compensation
Stock-based compensation cost is measured at the grant date based on the fair value of the award, and is recognized as expense over the requisite service period (generally the vesting period) under the straight-line amortization method.
The Company estimates the fair value of the stock options granted using the Black-Scholes option pricing formula and a single option award approach. For new-hire grants, options typically vest with respect to 25% of the shares one year after the option’s vesting commencement date and the remainder ratably on a monthly basis over three years, commencing one year after the vesting commencement date. For annual refresh grants, options typically vest ratably on a monthly basis over three, four or five years. In 2011, the Company granted performance-based stock options to executives as part of the Company’s annual refresh grant process. The performance-based stock options entitle the Company’s executive team to receive a number of options to purchase the Company’s common stock based on pre-established performance criteria over approximately one year. These performance metrics are classified as performance conditions, and the Company evaluates the performance status at the end of each period and records the expense when deemed probable. The Company makes a number of estimates and assumptions in determining stock-based compensation related to options including the following:
| • | The expected forfeiture rate is estimated based on the Company’s historical forfeiture data and compensation costs are recognized only for those equity awards expected to vest. The estimation of the forfeiture rate requires judgment, and to the extent actual forfeitures differ from expectations, changes in estimate will be recorded as an adjustment in the period when such estimates are revised. Actual results may differ substantially from the estimates. |
| • | Expected volatility of the Company’s stock is based on the weighted-average implied and historical volatility of Infinera and its peer group. The peer group is comprised of similar companies in the same industrial sector. As the Company gains more historical volatility data, the weighting of its own data in the expected volatility calculation associated with options will gradually increase. |
66
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
The Company estimates the fair value of the rights to acquire stock under its Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”) using the Black-Scholes option pricing formula. The Company’s ESPP typically provides for consecutive six-month offering periods and the Company uses its own historical volatility data in the valuation of ESPP shares.
The Company accounts for the fair value of restricted stock units (“RSUs”) using the closing market price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. For new-hire grants, RSUs typically vest ratably on an annual basis over four years. For annual refresh grants, RSUs typically vest ratably on an annual basis over three, four or five years. In 2009, the Company also granted retention RSUs to executive officers which cliff vest after an approximate two-year period.
The Company grants PSUs with market conditions and estimates the fair value using a Monte Carlo simulation model. The Company granted PSUs in 2009 as part of the Company’s annual refresh grant process. These PSUs entitle the Company’s executive officers and members of its board of directors to receive a number of shares of the Company’s common stock based on the Company’s stock price performance over a three-year or four-year period as compared to the NASDAQ Composite Index (“NASDAQ”) for the same period. The PSUs cliff vest after three or four years and the number of shares to be issued upon vesting ranges from 0.5 to 2.0 times the number of PSUs granted depending on the relative performance of the Company’s common stock price compared to NASDAQ. This performance metric is classified as a market condition.
The Monte Carlo simulation model is based on a discounted cash flow approach, with the simulation of a large number of possible stock price outcomes for the Company’s stock and NASDAQ. The use of the Monte Carlo simulation model requires the input of a number of assumptions including expected volatility of the Company’s stock price, expected volatility of NASDAQ, correlation between changes in the Company’s stock price and changes in NASDAQ, risk-free interest rate, and expected dividends. Expected volatility of the Company’s stock is based on the weighted-average implied and historical volatility of the Company’s peer group in the industry in which the Company does business. Expected volatility of NASDAQ is based on the historical and implied data. Correlation is based on the historical relationship between the Company’s peer group stock price and NASDAQ composite average. The risk-free interest rate is based upon the treasury zero-coupon yield appropriate for the term of the PSU as of the grant date. The expected dividend yield is zero for the Company as it does not expect to pay dividends in the future. The expected dividend yield for NASDAQ is the annual dividend yield expressed as a percentage of the composite average of NASDAQ on the grant date.
In 2012, the Company granted PSUs with performance conditions and estimated the fair value using the closing market price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. These PSUs entitle the Company’s executive officers to receive a number of shares of the Company’s common stock based on pre-established performance criteria over approximately two and a half years. The PSUs cliff vest at 50% upon achievement of specific revenue criteria and 50% will cliff vest upon achievement of specific operating profit criteria. This performance metric is classified as a performance condition.
Inventory Valuation
Inventories consist of raw materials, work-in-process and finished goods and are stated at standard cost adjusted to approximate the lower of actual cost (first-in, first-out method) or market. Market value is based upon an estimated selling price reduced by the estimated cost of disposal. The determination of market value involves numerous judgments including estimated average selling prices based upon recent sales volumes, industry trends, existing customer orders, current contract price, future demand and pricing and technological obsolescence of the Company’s products.
Inventory that is obsolete or in excess of the Company’s forecasted demand or is anticipated to be sold at a loss is written down to its estimated net realizable value based on historical usage and expected demand. As of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company’s inventory value had been reduced by $6.9 million and $6.3 million, respectively, for excess and obsolescence. In valuing its deferred inventory costs, the Company
67
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
considered whether the utility of the products delivered or expected to be delivered at less than cost, primarily comprised of common equipment, had declined. The Company concluded that, in the instances where the utility of the products delivered or expected to be delivered was less than cost, it was appropriate to value the inventory costs and deferred inventory costs at cost or market, whichever is lower, thereby recognizing the cost of the reduction in utility in the period in which the reduction occurred or can be reasonably estimated. The Company has, therefore, recognized inventory write-downs as necessary in each period in order to reflect inventory at the lower of cost or market (“LCM”). As of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company’s inventory value had been reduced by $7.5 million and $7.3 million, respectively, for LCM adjustments.
The Company considered whether it should accrue losses on firm purchase commitments related to inventory items. Given that the expected selling price of common equipment in the future remains below-cost, the Company has also recorded losses on these firm purchase commitments in the period in which the commitment is made. When the inventory parts related to these firm purchase commitments are received, that inventory is recorded at the purchase price less the accrual for the loss on the purchase commitment.
If actual market conditions are less favorable than those projected by management, additional inventory write-downs may be required.
Accounts Receivable and Allowances for Doubtful Accounts
Accounts receivable consist of trade receivables recorded upon recognition of revenue for product and services revenues, reduced by reserves for estimated bad debts and returns. Trade accounts receivable are recorded at the invoiced amount and do not bear interest. Credit is extended based on evaluation of the customer’s financial condition. The Company records its accounts receivable at the invoiced value. Management makes judgments as to its ability to collect outstanding receivables and provides allowances for a portion of receivables when collection becomes doubtful. Provisions are made based upon a review of all significant outstanding invoices. At December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company’s allowance for doubtful accounts was $0.1 million and zero, respectively.
Allowances for Sales Returns
Customer product returns are approved on a case by case basis. Specific reserve provisions are made based upon a specific review of all the approved product returns, where the customer has yet to return the products to generate the related sales return credit at the end of a period. Estimated sales returns are provided for as a reduction to revenue in 2010, 2011 and 2012. These were insignificant for any period presented on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. At December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, revenue reserves recorded for potential sales returns were $1.3 million and $0.2 million, respectively.
Accrued Warranty
The Company warrants that its products will operate substantially in conformity with product specifications. Upon delivery of the Company’s products, the Company provides for the estimated cost to repair or replace products or the related components that may be returned under warranty. The Company’s hardware warranty periods range from one to five years from date of acceptance for hardware and 90 days for software warranty. The hardware warranty accrual is based on actual historical returns experience and the application of those historical return rates to the Company’s in-warranty installed base. The Company periodically assesses the adequacy of its recorded warranty liabilities and adjusts the amounts as necessary. The Company has software warranty support obligations to a small number of its customers and the costs associated with providing these software warranties have been insignificant to the Company’s consolidated financial statements to date.
Cash, Cash Equivalents and Short-term and Long-term Investments
The Company considers all highly liquid instruments with an original maturity at the date of purchase of 90 days or less to be cash equivalents. These instruments may include cash, money market funds and commercial
68
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
paper. The Company maintains its cash in bank deposit accounts which, at times, may exceed federally insured limits. The Company has not experienced any losses in such accounts.
Marketable securities consist of certificates of deposit, commercial paper, corporate bonds, U.S. agency notes, U.S. treasuries and auction rate securities (“ARS”). The Company considers all debt instruments with original maturities at the date of purchase greater than 90 days and remaining time to maturity of one year or less to be short-term investments. The Company classifies debt instruments with remaining maturities greater than one year as long-term investments, unless the Company intends to settle its holdings within one year or less and in such case it is considered to be short-term investments. The Company determines the appropriate classification of its marketable securities at the time of purchase and re-evaluates such designations as of each balance sheet date.
Available-for-sale investments are stated at fair market value with unrealized gains and losses recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive loss in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets and Other income (expense), net in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. The Company evaluates its available-for-sale marketable debt securities for other-than-temporary impairments as discussed below and records any credit loss portion in Other income (expense), net in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. The amortized cost of debt securities is adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity and for any credit losses incurred on these securities. Gains and losses are recognized when realized in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations under the specific identification method. Trading securities investments are stated at fair value with unrealized gains and losses reported in Other income (expense), net in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations, consisting of ARS trading securities and related put rights.
Fair Value Measurement of Investments
Pursuant to the accounting guidance for fair value measurements and its subsequent updates, fair value is defined as the price that would be received from selling an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. When determining the fair value measurements for assets and liabilities required or permitted to be recorded at fair value, the Company considers the principal or most advantageous market in which it would transact and it considers assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability.
Valuation techniques used by the Company are based upon observable and unobservable inputs. Observable or market inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect the Company’s assumptions about market participant assumptions based on best information available. Observable inputs are the preferred source of values. These two types of inputs create the following fair value hierarchy:
| Level 1 — | Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. |
| 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-based valuation techniques for which all significant assumptions are observable in the market or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities. |
| Level 3 — | Prices or valuations that require management inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable. |
The Company measures its cash equivalents, derivative instruments and debt securities at fair value and classifies its securities in accordance with the fair value hierarchy. The Company’s money market funds and U.S. treasuries are classified within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy and are valued based on quoted prices in active markets for identical securities.
69
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
The Company classifies its certificates of deposit, commercial paper, corporate bonds, and foreign currency exchange forward contracts within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy as follows:
Certificates of Deposit
The Company reviews market pricing and other observable market inputs for the same or similar securities obtained from a number of industry standard data providers. In the event that a transaction is observed for the same or similar security in the marketplace, the price on that transaction reflects the market price and fair value on that day. In the absence of any observable market transactions for a particular security, the fair market value at period end would be equal to the par value. These inputs represent quoted prices for similar assets or these inputs have been derived from observable market data, and result in the classification of these securities as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
Commercial Paper
The Company reviews market pricing and other observable market inputs for the same or similar securities obtained from a number of industry standard data providers. In the event that a transaction is observed for the same or similar security in the marketplace, the price on that transaction reflects the market price and fair value on that day and then follows a revised accretion schedule to determine the fair market value at period end. In the absence of any observable market transactions for a particular security, the fair market value at period end is derived by accreting from the last observable market price. These inputs represent quoted prices for similar assets or these inputs have been derived from observable market data accreted mathematically to par, and result in the classification of these securities as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
Corporate Bonds
The Company reviews trading activity and pricing for each of the corporate bond securities in its portfolio as of the measurement date and determines if pricing data of sufficient frequency and volume in an active market exists in order to support Level 1 classification of these securities. Since sufficient quoted pricing for identical securities is not available, the Company obtains market pricing and other observable market inputs for similar securities from a number of industry standard data providers. In instances where multiple prices exist for similar securities, these prices are used as inputs into a distribution-curve to determine the fair market value at period end. As a result, the Company classifies its corporate bonds as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
Foreign Currency Exchange Forward Contracts
As discussed in Note 5, “Derivative Instruments,” to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, the Company mainly holds non-speculative foreign exchange forward contracts to hedge certain foreign currency exchange exposures. The Company estimates the fair values of derivatives based on quoted market prices or pricing models using current market rates. Where applicable, these models project future cash flows and discount the future amounts to a present value using market-based observable inputs including interest rate curves, credit risk, foreign exchange rates, and forward and spot prices for currencies. As a result, the Company classifies its derivative instruments as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.
The Company classifies its ARS within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.
The Company’s ARS are classified within Level 3 because they are valued, in part, by using inputs that are unobservable in the market and are significant to the valuation. These ARS represent approximately 2% of the Company’s total investment portfolio as of December 29, 2012. Uncertainties in the credit markets have affected all of the Company’s ARS and auctions for these securities have failed to settle on their respective settlement dates. In light of these developments, to determine the fair value for the Company’s ARS, the Company used a combination of the market approach and income approach. The market approach uses pricing based on transactions in an inactive secondary market for similar or comparable securities. In addition, the Company performed its own discounted cash flow analysis. Management determined that it was most appropriate to value
70
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
the ARS using the market approach and income approach equally given the facts and circumstances as of December 29, 2012, and therefore incorporated both valuations in the Company’s fair value measurement.
The significant unobservable inputs and assumptions used in the discounted cash flow model to determine the fair value of the Company’s ARS, as of December 29, 2012, are as follows:
| • | Contractual cash flow |
The model assumed that the principal amount or par value for these securities will be repaid at the end of the estimated workout period. In addition, future interest payments were estimated as described in each individual prospectus and based on the then-current U.S. Treasury Bill rate adjusted for a failed auction premium of 150 basis points (“bps”).
| • | ARS discount rate |
The model incorporated a discount rate equal to an estimate of the LIBOR rates commensurate with the estimated workout period of the securities. As of the measurement date, these rates were then adjusted by a factor of 204 bps, representing an estimate of the market student loan spread and a discount factor to reflect the lack of liquidity and credit risk associated with these securities. As of December 29, 2012, the Company held $3.1 million (par value) of A3 rated securities. The Company’s ARS are mostly collateralized by student loans guaranteed by the U.S. government under the Federal Family Education Loan Program. The discount rate does, however, include a discount factor to reflect the issuer’s credit risk and its potential inability to perform its obligations under the terms of the ARS agreements. The Company’s valuation analysis indicates that the estimated credit risk element included in the discount rate was 209 bps.
| • | Estimated maturity |
The Company estimated the workout period of its ARS as the weighted-average life of the underlying trust loan portfolio where this information was available from servicing and other trust reports. In a small number of instances where this information was not available, the Company used the weighted-average life of the loan portfolio of a similar trust. The estimated time to maturity of the securities as of the measurement date was 6.7 years.
Other-Than-Temporary Impairments
The Company reviews its available-for-sale marketable debt securities on a regular basis to evaluate whether or not a security has experienced an other-than-temporary decline in fair value. If a debt security’s market value is below amortized cost and the Company either intends to sell the security or it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the security before its anticipated recovery, the Company records an other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) charge to earnings for the entire amount of the impairment.
When the Company does not intend to sell an impaired security and it is not more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell prior to recovery of its amortized cost basis, the Company separates the OTTI into credit and non-credit loss portions. The amount representing the credit loss is recognized in Other income (expense), net, and the amount related to all other factors is recognized in Accumulated other comprehensive loss.
In determining if a credit loss has occurred, it is the Company’s policy to isolate the credit loss related portion of the discount rate used to derive the fair market value of the security and apply this to the expected cash flows in order to determine the portion of the OTTI that is credit loss related. This credit related portion of the discount rate is based on the financial condition of the issuer, changes in rating agency credit ratings for the security or increases in credit related yield spreads on similar securities offered by the same issuer.
Once a credit impairment loss has been recognized in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations, the amortized cost basis of that available-for-sale security is reduced by the amount of the credit impairment loss, resulting in a new cost basis for the security. Any non-credit related unrealized gains and losses are recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive loss in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. The Company will
71
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
continue to monitor the security’s credit rating and credit spread and will accrete any reduction in the credit impairment loss to interest income over the expected life of the security.
Property, Plant and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost. This includes enterprise-level business software that the Company customizes to meets its specific operational needs. Depreciation is calculated using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the respective assets. Leasehold improvements are amortized using the straight-line method over the shorter of the lease term or estimated useful life of the asset. An assumption of lease renewal where a renewal option exists is used only when the renewal has been determined to be reasonably assured. Repair and maintenance costs are expensed as incurred. The estimated useful life for each asset category is as follows:
| Estimated Useful lives | ||||
| Laboratory and manufacturing equipment |
1.5 to 10 years | |||
| Furniture and fixtures |
3 to 5 years | |||
| Computer hardware and software |
1.5 to 3 years | |||
| Enterprise-level software |
up to 7 years | |||
| Leasehold improvements |
1 to 10 years | |||
The Company regularly reviews long-lived assets for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of these assets may not be recoverable or that the useful life is shorter than originally estimated. If impairment indicators are present and the projected future undiscounted cash flows are less than the carrying value of the assets, the carrying values are reduced to the estimated fair value. If assets are determined to be recoverable, but the useful lives are shorter than originally estimated, the carrying value of the assets is depreciated over the newly determined remaining useful lives.
Deferred Inventory Costs
When the Company’s products have been delivered and ownership (typically defined as title and risk of loss) has transferred to the customer, but the product revenue associated with the arrangement has been deferred as a result of not meeting the revenue recognition criteria or the costs are related to product sales bundled with training, software warranty or product support services where the revenue is deferred and recognized ratably, the Company also defers the related inventory costs for the delivered items and recognizes the inventory costs either ratably or when the related revenue meets the revenue recognition criteria.
Accounting for Income Taxes
As part of the process of preparing the Company’s consolidated financial statements, the Company is required to estimate its taxes in each of the jurisdictions in which it operates. The Company estimates actual current tax expense together with assessing temporary differences resulting from different treatment of items, such as accruals and allowances not currently deductible for tax purposes. These differences result in deferred tax assets and liabilities, which are included in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. In general, deferred tax assets represent future tax benefits to be received when certain expenses previously recognized in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations become deductible expenses under applicable income tax laws or loss or credit carryforwards are utilized. Accordingly, realization of the Company’s deferred tax assets is dependent on future taxable income within the respective jurisdictions against which these deductions, losses and credits can be utilized within the applicable future periods.
The Company must assess the likelihood that some portion or all of its deferred tax assets will be recovered from future taxable income within the respective jurisdictions, and to the extent the Company believes that recovery does not meet the “more-likely-than-not” standard, the Company must establish a valuation allowance. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during
72
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. Management judgment is required in determining the Company’s provision for income taxes, the Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities and any valuation allowance recorded against its net deferred tax assets. At December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company’s domestic net deferred tax assets were fully reserved with a valuation allowance because, based on the available evidence, the Company believed at that time it was more likely than not that it would not be able to utilize those deferred tax assets in the future. The Company intends to maintain a valuation allowance until sufficient evidence exists to support the reversal of the valuation allowance. The Company makes estimates and judgments about its future taxable income, by jurisdiction, based on assumptions that are consistent with its plans and estimates. Should the actual amounts differ from the Company’s estimates, the amount of its valuation allowance could be materially impacted.
Concentration of Risk
Financial instruments that are potentially subject to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash equivalents, short-term investments, long-term investments, cost-method investments and accounts receivable. Investment policies have been implemented that limit investments to investment-grade securities.
As of December 29, 2012, the Company held $3.1 million (par value) of investments comprised of ARS, which are variable-rate debt securities and have a long-term maturity with the interest rate being reset through auctions that are typically held every 7 to 35 days. These securities have historically traded at par value and are callable at par value at the option of the issuer. Interest is typically paid at the end of each auction period or semiannually. Since February 2008, most of the auctions for these ARS have failed and there is no assurance that future auctions will succeed. As a result, the Company’s ability to liquidate its investment in the near term may be limited. These ARS were purchased from a single broker, who to date, has not offered to repurchase these remaining ARS from the Company. All of these ARS (par value) are A3 rated, and are mostly collateralized by student loans guaranteed by the U.S. government under the Federal Family Education Loan Program.
As of December 29, 2012, the Company has invested $9.0 million in a privately-held company. This investment has been accounted for as a cost-basis investment, as the Company owns less than 20% of the voting securities and does not have the ability to exercise significant influence over operating and financial policies of the entity. See Note 4, “Cost-method Investment,” to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for more information.
The risk with respect to accounts receivable is mitigated by ongoing credit evaluations that the Company performs on its customers. As the Company expands its sales internationally, it may experience increased levels of customer credit risk associated with those regions. Collateral is generally not required for accounts receivable but may be used in the future to mitigate credit risk associated with customers located in certain geographical regions.
As of December 29, 2012, no customer accounted for more than 10% of the Company’s accounts receivable balance. As of December 31, 2011, the Company had amounts due from one customer that represented approximately 10% of the Company’s accounts receivable balance.
To date, a few of the Company’s customers have accounted for a significant portion of its revenue. In 2012 and 2011 no customer represented over 10% of the Company’s revenue.
The Company depends on a single or limited number of suppliers for components and raw materials. The Company generally purchases these single or limited source components and materials through standard purchase orders and does not have long-term contracts with many of these limited-source suppliers. While the Company seeks to maintain sufficient reserve stock of such components and materials, the Company’s business and results of operations could be adversely affected by a stoppage or delay in receiving such components and materials, the receipt of defective parts, an increase in the price of such components and materials or the Company’s inability to obtain reduced pricing from its suppliers in response to competitive pressures.
73
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Derivative Instruments
The Company is exposed to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations in the normal course of its business. As part of its risk management strategy, the Company uses derivative instruments, specifically forward contracts, to reduce the impact of foreign exchange fluctuations on earnings. The forward contracts are with one high-quality institution and the Company monitors the creditworthiness of the counter party consistently. The Company’s objective is to offset gains and losses resulting from these exposures with losses and gains on the derivative contracts used to hedge them, thereby reducing volatility of earnings or protecting fair values of assets. None of the Company’s derivative instruments contain credit-risk related contingent features, any rights to reclaim cash collateral or any obligation to return cash collateral. The Company does not have any leveraged derivatives. The Company does not use derivative contracts for trading or speculative purposes.
The Company enters into foreign currency exchange forward contracts to manage its exposure to fluctuations in foreign exchange rates that arise primarily from its Euro denominated receivables and Euro denominated restricted cash balance amounts that are pledged as collateral for certain stand-by and commercial letters of credit. Gains and losses on these contracts are intended to offset the impact of foreign exchange rate changes on the underlying foreign currency denominated accounts receivables and restricted cash, and therefore, do not subject the Company to material balance sheet risk. The forward contracts are with one high-quality institution and the Company consistently monitors the creditworthiness of the counterparty. The forward contracts entered into during 2012 were denominated in Euros and typically had maturities of no more than 30 days. The contracts are settled for U.S. dollars at maturity at rates agreed to at inception of the contracts.
From time to time, the Company also uses foreign currency exchange forward contracts to hedge exposures related to forecasted sales denominated in Euro. These contracts are designated as cash flow hedges and would match the underlying forecasted transactions in duration. The contracts would be carried on the balance sheet at fair value, and the effective portion of the contracts’ gains and losses would be recorded as Accumulated other comprehensive loss until the forecasted transaction occurs. For foreign currency exchange forward contracts designated as cash flow hedges, the Company evaluates and calculates the effectiveness of each hedge quarterly, using the critical terms match method. When the forecasted transaction occurs, the Company reclassifies the related gain or loss on the cash flow hedge to revenue. If it is determined that a hedged forecasted transaction is unlikely to occur, the Company discontinues its cash flow hedges and any gains or losses on the foreign currency exchange forward contracts would be reclassified from other comprehensive income into earnings.
Foreign Currency Translation and Transactions
The Company considers the functional currencies of its foreign subsidiaries to be the local currency. Assets and liabilities recorded in foreign currencies are translated at the exchange rate as of the balance sheet date, and costs and expenses are translated at average exchange rates in effect during the period. Equity transactions are translated using historical exchange rates. The effects of foreign currency translation adjustments are recorded as a separate component of Accumulated Comprehensive Loss in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
For all non-functional currency account balances, the re-measurement of such balances to the functional currency will result in either a foreign exchange transaction gain or loss which is recorded to Other gain (loss), net in the same period that the re-measurement occurred. Aggregate foreign currency transaction loss recorded in 2012 were insignificant. Aggregate foreign currency transaction loss recorded in 2011 and 2010 were, $1.0 million and $0.7 million, respectively.
The Company entered into foreign currency exchange forward contracts to reduce the impact of foreign exchange fluctuations on earnings from accounts receivable balances beginning in 2009, and restricted cash beginning in the third quarter of 2011, both accounts receivable and restricted cash are primarily denominated in Euro. The foreign currency transactions on these forward contracts amounted to a loss of $1.4 million in 2012, a loss of $1.3 million in 2011, and a gain of $0.9 million in 2010, and substantially offset the transaction gains and losses from the re-measurement of the related accounts receivable.
74
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Advertising
All advertising costs are expensed as incurred. Advertising expenses in 2012, 2011 and 2010 were $1.6 million, $1.5 million and $1.1 million, respectively.
Research and Development
All costs to develop the Company’s hardware products are expensed as incurred. Software development costs are capitalized beginning when a product’s technological feasibility has been established and ending when a product is available for general release to customers. Generally, the Company’s software products are released soon after technological feasibility has been established. As a result, costs subsequent to achieving technological feasibility have not been significant and all software development costs have been expensed as incurred.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In May 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-04, Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (Topic 820)—Fair Value Measurement (ASU 2011-04), to provide a consistent definition of fair value and ensure that the fair value measurement and disclosure requirements are similar between U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards. ASU 2011-04 changes certain fair value measurement principles and enhances the disclosure requirements particularly for Level 3 fair value measurements. The Company adopted the amended disclosure requirements beginning in its fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2012. The adoption of the amended disclosure requirements did not have an impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flow.
In June 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220)—Presentation of Comprehensive Income (ASU 2011-05), to require an entity to present the total of comprehensive income, the components of net income, and the components of other comprehensive income either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. ASU 2011-05 eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of equity. In December 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-12, Deferral of the Effective Date for Amendments to the Presentation of Reclassifications of Items Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Accounting Standards Update No. 2011-05 (ASU 2011-12), to defer the effective date of the specific requirement to present items that are reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income to net income alongside their respective components of net income and other comprehensive income. The Company adopted the guidance for ASU 2011-05 and ASU 2011-12 beginning in its fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2012. The adoption of the guidance resulted in a change in the format of certain presentation but did not have an impact on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flow.
In February 2013, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2013-02, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220)—Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (“ASU 2013-02”). ASU 2013-02 requires an entity to report the effect of significant reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income on the respective line items in net income if the amount being reclassified is required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in its entirety to net income. For other amounts that are not required under U.S GAAP to be reclassified in their entirety to net income in the same reporting period, an entity is required to cross-reference other disclosures required under U.S. GAAP that provide additional detail about those amounts. This accounting update will be applicable to the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal year 2013. Other than requiring additional disclosures, the Company does not anticipate material impacts on its financial statements upon adoption.
75
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
| 3. | Fair Value Measurements and Other-Than-Temporary Impairments |
Fair Value Measurements
The following tables represent the Company’s fair value hierarchy for its marketable securities measured at fair value on a recurring basis (in thousands):
| As of December 29, 2012 | As of December 31, 2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fair Value Measured Using | Fair Value Measured Using | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | Level 1 | Level 2 | Level 3 | Total | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Assets |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Money market funds |
$ | 25,560 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 25,560 | $ | 53,208 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 53,208 | ||||||||||||||||
| Certificates of deposit |
0 | 2,160 | 0 | 2,160 | 0 | 16,778 | 0 | 16,778 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Commercial paper |
0 | 14,843 | 0 | 14,843 | 0 | 5,888 | 0 | 5,888 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Corporate bonds |
0 | 57,467 | 0 | 57,467 | 0 | 87,694 | 0 | 87,694 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. agency notes |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 9,999 | 0 | 9,999 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| U.S. treasuries |
15,020 | 0 | 0 | 15,020 | 27,577 | 0 | 0 | 27,577 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ARS |
0 | 0 | 2,873 | 2,873 | 0 | 0 | 7,675 | 7,675 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Total assets |
$ | 40,580 | $ | 74,470 | $ | 2,873 | $ | 117,923 | $ | 80,785 | $ | 120,359 | $ | 7,675 | $ | 208,819 | ||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Liabilities |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Foreign currency exchange forward contracts |
$ | 0 | $ | 112 | $ | 0 | $ | 112 | $ | 0 | $ | 82 | $ | 0 | $ | 82 | ||||||||||||||||
During 2012 and 2011, there were no transfers of assets or liabilities between Level I and Level II and there were no transfers into or out of Level III financial assets.
The following tables present a reconciliation of all assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable (Level III) inputs (in thousands):
| December 31, 2011 |
Total Net Gains Included in Other Comprehensive Income |
Calls | December 29, 2012 |
|||||||||||||
| ARS—available-for-sale |
$ | 7,675 | $ | 146 | (1) | $ | (4,948 | )(2) | $ | 2,873 | ||||||
| December 25, 2010 |
Total Net Gains Included in Other Comprehensive Income |
Calls | December 31, 2011 |
|||||||||||||
| ARS—available-for-sale |
$ | 7,790 | $ | 403 | (1) | $ | (518 | )(2) | $ | 7,675 | ||||||
| Total Net Gains (Losses) Included In | ||||||||||||||||||||
| December 26, 2009 |
Other Income (Expense), Net |
Other Comprehensive Income |
Calls | December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||||||||
| ARS—available-for-sale |
$ | 7,671 | $ | — | $ | 763 | (1) | $ | (644 | )(3) | $ | 7,790 | ||||||||
| ARS—trading securities |
49,911 | 1,696 | (4) | — | (51,607 | )(3) | — | |||||||||||||
| Put Rights |
10,864 | (1,696 | )(5) | — | (9,168 | )(3) | — | |||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Total |
$ | 68,446 | $ | — | $ | 763 | $ | (61,419 | ) | $ | 7,790 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| (1) | Amount represents the change in the non-credit gain related other-than-temporary impairments (“OTTI”) recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive loss in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. |
| (2) | Amount represents the fair market value of the securities called. Realized gains on these calls were $0.5 million in 2012 and insignificant for 2011. |
76
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
| (3) | Amount represents the fair market value of the securities called and related put rights. Realized gains on these calls were insignificant. |
| (4) | Unrealized holding gains for ARS trading securities were included in Other gain (loss), net in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. |
| (5) | Amount represents the decrease in the fair value of the put rights recorded as Other gain (loss), net in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. |
Investments were as follows (in thousands):
| December 29, 2012 | ||||||||||||||||
| Adjusted Amortized Cost |
Gross Unrealized Gains |
Gross Unrealized Losses |
Fair Value | |||||||||||||
| Money market funds |
$ | 25,560 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 25,560 | ||||||||
| Certificates of deposit |
2,160 | 0 | 0 | 2,160 | ||||||||||||
| Commercial paper |
14,848 | 0 | (5 | ) | 14,843 | |||||||||||
| Corporate bonds |
57,451 | 22 | (6 | ) | 57,467 | |||||||||||
| U.S. treasuries |
15,015 | 5 | 0 | 15,020 | ||||||||||||
| ARS |
2,707 | (1) | 166 | 0 | 2,873 | |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
| Total available-for-sale investments |
$ | 117,741 | $ | 193 | $ | (11 | ) | $ | 117,923 | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
| December 31, 2011 | ||||||||||||||||
| Adjusted Amortized Cost |
Gross Unrealized Gains |
Gross Unrealized Losses |
Fair Value | |||||||||||||
| Money market funds |
$ | 53,208 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 53,208 | ||||||||
| Certificates of deposit |
16,797 | 0 | (19 | ) | 16,778 | |||||||||||
| Commercial paper |
5,898 | 0 | (10 | ) | 5,888 | |||||||||||
| Corporate bonds |
87,808 | 7 | (121 | ) | 87,694 | |||||||||||
| U.S. agency notes |
9,998 | 2 | (1 | ) | 9,999 | |||||||||||
| U.S. treasuries |
27,577 | 5 | (5 | ) | 27,577 | |||||||||||
| ARS |
7,368 | (2) | 307 | 0 | 7,675 | |||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
| Total available-for-sale investments |
$ | 208,654 | $ | 321 | $ | (156 | ) | $ | 208,819 | |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
| (1) | Amount represents the par value less $0.4 million of credit-related OTTI recognized through earnings in prior years. |
| (2) | Amount represents the par value less $0.9 million of credit-related OTTI recognized through earnings in prior years. |
As of December 29, 2012, the Company’s available-for-sale investments in certificates of deposit, commercial paper, corporate bonds, and U.S. treasuries have a contractual maturity term of up to 12 months, and ARS have contractual maturity terms of up to 33.0 years. Proceeds from sales, maturities and calls of available-for-sale investments were $129.2 million, $291.9 million and $232.3 million in 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. Gross realized gains (losses) on short-term and long-term investments were insignificant for these periods. The specific identification method is used to account for gains and losses on available-for-sale investments.
77
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Other-Than-Temporary Impairments
During the second quarter of 2009, the Company determined that it did not intend to sell its ARS and did not believe that it was more likely than not that it would be required to sell the securities before recovery of their par value. However, given that the present value of the expected cash flows for these securities was below their par value, as of June 27, 2009, an initial OTTI of $2.7 million, equal to the difference between the fair value and the amortized cost basis, had occurred. This OTTI write-down was separated into an amount representing credit loss, which was recognized as Other gain (loss), net in the Company’s consolidated statements of operations, and an amount related to all other factors, which was recorded in Accumulated other comprehensive loss in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. In determining if a credit loss had occurred, the Company isolated the credit loss related portion of the discount rate used to derive the fair market value of the securities and applied this to the expected cash flows in order to determine the portion of the OTTI that was credit loss related. This credit loss related portion of the discount rate is based on the financial condition of the issuer, rating agency credit ratings for the security and credit related yield spreads on similar securities offered by the same issuer.
During 2012, $5.0 million of AAA rated ARS and $0.2 million A3 rated ARS were called at par value. During 2011, $0.6 million of A3 rated ARS were called at par value. Realized gains for these ARS for 2012 and 2011 were $0.5 million and zero, respectively.
As of December 29, 2012, the Company held $3.1 million (par value) of A3 rated available-for-sale ARS. These remaining ARS had an insignificant net increase in fair value for 2012. This change was recognized in Accumulated other comprehensive loss in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. The Company did not recognize any additional OTTI credit loss on any of its securities during 2012.
A roll-forward of amortized cost, cumulative OTTI recognized in earnings and Accumulated other comprehensive loss is as follows (in thousands):
| Amortized Cost |
Cumulative OTTI in Earnings |
Unrealized Gain |
OTTI Loss in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss |
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) |
||||||||||||||||||
| Balance at December 31, 2011 |
$ | 7,367 | $ | (884 | ) | $ | 1,619 | $ | (1,312 | ) | $ | 307 | ||||||||||
| Unrealized gain |
0 | 0 | 146 | 0 | 146 | |||||||||||||||||
| Call on investments |
(4,660 | ) | 490 | (981 | ) | 694 | (287 | ) | ||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
| Balance at December 29, 2012 |
$ | 2,707 | $ | (394 | ) | $ | 784 | $ | (618 | ) | $ | 166 | ||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||
The Company believes that the credit risk associated with its available-for-sale ARS could change significantly in the future based on market conditions and continued uncertainties in the financial markets. The ARS student loan credit spread may be subject to significant volatility and it is difficult to predict future fluctuations. A 10% deterioration in the ARS student loan credit spread would not result in a significant amount in the credit loss related portion of the OTTI for 2012.
4. Cost-method Investment
As of December 29, 2012, the Company’s investment in a privately-held company was $9.0 million. This investment is accounted for as a cost-basis investment as the Company owns less than 20% of the voting securities and does not have the ability to exercise significant influence over operating and financial policies of the entity. The Company’s investment is in an entity that is not publicly traded and, therefore, no established market for the securities exists. The Company’s cost-method investment is carried at historical cost in its consolidated financial statements and measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis when indicators of impairment exists. If the Company believes that the carrying value of the cost basis investment is in excess of estimated fair value, the
78
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Company’s policy is to record an impairment charge in Other income (expense), net in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations to adjust the carrying value to estimated fair value, when the impairment is deemed other-than-temporary. The Company regularly evaluates the carrying value of this cost-method investment for impairment. As of December 29, 2012, no event had occurred that would adversely affect the carrying value of this investment, therefore, the fair value of the cost-method investment is not estimated. The Company did not record any impairment charges for this cost-method investment during 2012, 2011 and 2010.
5. Derivative Instruments
Foreign Currency Exchange Forward Contracts
The Company enters into foreign currency exchange forward contracts to manage its exposure to fluctuations in foreign exchange rates that arise primarily from its Euro denominated receivables and Euro denominated restricted cash balance amounts that are pledged as collateral for certain stand-by and commercial letters of credit. Gains and losses on these contracts are intended to offset the impact of foreign exchange rate changes on the underlying foreign currency denominated accounts receivables and restricted cash, and therefore, do not subject the Company to material balance sheet risk. The forward contracts are with one high-quality institution and the Company consistently monitors the creditworthiness of the counterparty. None of the Company’s derivative instruments contain credit-risk related contingent features, any rights to reclaim cash collateral or any obligation to return cash collateral. The forward contracts entered into during 2012 were denominated in Euros and typically had maturities of no more than 30 days. The contracts are settled for U.S. dollars at maturity at rates agreed to at inception of the contracts.
As of December 29, 2012, the Company did not designate foreign currency exchange forward contracts related to Euro denominated receivables and restricted cash as hedges for accounting purposes, and, accordingly, changes in the fair value of these instruments are included in Other gain (loss), net in the accompanying consolidated statements of operations. The before-tax effect of foreign currency exchange forward contracts for Euro denominated receivables and restricted cash not designated as hedging instruments was a loss of $1.4 million for 2012, a loss of $1.3 million for 2011, and a gain of $0.9 million in 2010, included in Other gain (loss), net in the consolidated statements of operations.
The fair value of derivative instruments not designated as hedging instruments in the Company’s consolidated balance sheets was as follows (in thousands):
| As of December 29, 2012 | As of December 31, 2011 | |||||||||||||||
| Gross Notional(1) |
Other Accrued Liabilities |
Gross Notional(1) |
Other Accrued Liabilities |
|||||||||||||
| Foreign currency exchange forward contracts |
||||||||||||||||
| Related to Euro denominated receivables |
$ | 22,882 | $ | (105 | ) | $ | 9,437 | $ | (71 | ) | ||||||
| Related to restricted cash |
$ | 1,495 | $ | (7 | ) | $ | 1,455 | $ | (11 | ) | ||||||
| (1) | Represents the face amounts of forward contracts that were outstanding as of the period noted. |
| 6. | Balance Sheet Details |
Restricted Cash
The Company’s restricted cash balance is primarily comprised of certificates of deposit, of which the majority are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. These amounts primarily collateralize the Company’s issuances of stand-by and commercial letters of credit. Additionally, the Company’s restricted cash balance includes a leave encashment fund for India employees.
79
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
The following table provides details of selected balance sheet items (in thousands):
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
|||||||
| Inventory: |
||||||||
| Raw materials |
$ | 13,003 | $ | 12,081 | ||||
| Work in process |
57,281 | 37,007 | ||||||
| Finished goods(1) |
57,525 | 39,908 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total |
$ | 127,809 | $ | 88,996 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Property, plant and equipment, net: |
||||||||
| Computer hardware |
$ | 9,024 | $ | 8,311 | ||||
| Computer software(2) |
15,834 | 7,584 | ||||||
| Laboratory and manufacturing equipment |
120,543 | 101,228 | ||||||
| Furniture and fixtures |
1,285 | 1,107 | ||||||
| Leasehold improvements |
33,370 | 26,736 | ||||||
| Construction in progress |
17,513 | 25,843 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Subtotal |
$ | 197,569 | $ | 170,809 | ||||
| Less accumulated depreciation and amortization(3) |
(117,226 | ) | (94,056 | ) | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total |
$ | 80,343 | $ | 76,753 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Accrued expenses: |
||||||||
| Loss contingency related to non-cancelable purchase commitments |
$ | 5,401 | $ | 5,705 | ||||
| Professional and other consulting fees |
3,703 | 2,005 | ||||||
| Taxes payable |
3,588 | 3,111 | ||||||
| Royalties |
1,516 | 1,309 | ||||||
| Accrued rebate and customer prepay liability |
1,284 | 4,078 | ||||||
| Other accrued expenses |
9,991 | 6,213 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total |
$ | 25,483 | $ | 22,421 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| (1) | Included in finished goods inventory at December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011 were $15.6 million and $8.9 million, respectively, of inventory at customer locations for which product acceptance had not occurred. |
| (2) | Included in computer software at December 29, 2012 was $7.5 million related to an enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) system that the Company implemented during the third quarter of 2012. |
| (3) | Depreciation expense was $23.5 million (which includes amortization of capitalized ERP costs of $0.4 million), $17.7 million and $15.4 million for 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. |
| 7. | Restructuring and Other Related Costs |
In July 2009, the Company announced a restructuring plan under which it closed its Maryland-based semiconductor fabrication plant and consolidated these activities into its primary fabrication plant located in Sunnyvale, California. This consolidation of activities into one location was expected to facilitate collaboration across integration platforms in support of the Company’s next-generation products. As a result, during 2009, the Company recorded $3.9 million of restructuring and other related costs including severance and related expenses, equipment and facilities-related costs, operating lease termination costs, and other exit costs. Equipment and facilities-related costs consist of increased depreciation expense related to restructured assets caused by shortening the useful life or updating the salvage value of depreciable fixed assets to coincide with the end of production under the approved restructuring plan. The Company completed its restructuring actions in 2010. Cumulative restructuring and other related costs through December 31, 2011 totaled $3.7 million. No remaining accrual existed at the end of 2011.
80
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
The types of restructuring and other related costs recorded were as follows (in thousands):
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||||||
| December 31, 2011 | December 25, 2010 | |||||||||||||||
| Cost of Revenue |
Operating Expenses |
Cost of Revenue |
Operating Expenses |
|||||||||||||
| Severance and related expenses (credits) |
$ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | (144 | ) | $ | 55 | |||||||
| Equipment and facilities-related credits |
0 | (129 | ) | (38 | ) | 0 | ||||||||||
| Lease termination |
0 | 0 | 0 | 104 | ||||||||||||
| Other |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
| Total |
$ | 0 | $ | (129 | ) | $ | (182 | ) | $ | 159 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||
| 8. | Comprehensive Loss |
Total comprehensive loss consists of other comprehensive loss and net loss. Other comprehensive loss includes certain changes in equity that are excluded from net loss. Specifically, cumulative foreign currency translation adjustments and unrealized holding gains (losses) on available-for-sale investments are included in Accumulated other comprehensive loss in the consolidated balance sheets.
The components of accumulated other comprehensive loss are as follows (in thousands):
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Accumulated unrealized gain (loss) on auction rate securities classified as available-for-sale investments |
$ | 166 | $ | 307 | $ | (103 | ) | |||||
| Accumulated unrealized holding gain (loss) on all other available-for-sale investments |
16 | (142 | ) | (37 | ) | |||||||
| Accumulated net unrealized loss on foreign currency translation adjustment |
(1,650 | ) | (1,607 | ) | (490 | ) | ||||||
| Accumulated tax effect on items related to available-for-sale investments |
(760 | ) | (753 | ) | (631 | ) | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total accumulated other comprehensive loss |
$ | (2,228 | ) | $ | (2,195 | ) | $ | (1,261 | ) | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| 9. | Basic and Diluted Net Loss Per Common Share |
Basic net loss per common share is computed by dividing net loss by the weighted average number of vested common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net loss per common share is computed using net loss and the weighted average number of common shares outstanding plus potentially dilutive common shares outstanding during the period. Under the treasury stock method, potentially dilutive common shares include the assumed exercise of outstanding stock options, assumed vesting of outstanding restricted stock units (“RSUs”) and performance stock units (“PSUs”), assumed exercise of outstanding warrants, and assumed issuance of stock under the Company’s employee stock purchase plan (“ESPP”).
81
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
The following table sets forth the computation of net loss per common share—basic and diluted (in thousands, except per share amounts):
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Net loss |
$ | (85,330 | ) | $ | (81,744 | ) | $ | (27,932 | ) | |||
| Weighted average common shares outstanding |
110,739 | 105,432 | 99,380 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Net loss per common share - basic and diluted |
$ | (0.77 | ) | $ | (0.78 | ) | $ | (0.28 | ) | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
The Company incurred net losses for the years ended December 29, 2012, December 31, 2011 and December 25, 2010, and as a result, before the application of the treasury stock method, potential common shares from options, stock awards, employee stock purchase plan shares and warrants totaling 18.3 million shares, 19.5 million shares and 18.0 million shares, respectively, were not included in the net loss per common share calculation, as their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive.
The Company had the following equity awards outstanding that could potentially dilute basic net loss per common share in the future, but were excluded from the computation of diluted loss per common share in the periods presented as their effect would have been anti-dilutive (in thousands):
| As of | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Stock options outstanding |
9,008 | 9,873 | 7,815 | |||||||||
| Restricted stock units |
6,703 | 5,957 | 6,783 | |||||||||
| Performance stock units |
1,368 | 2,595 | 2,682 | |||||||||
| Employee stock purchase plan shares |
1,100 | 943 | 636 | |||||||||
| Warrants to purchase common stock |
93 | 93 | 124 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total |
18,272 | 19,461 | 18,040 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
10. Commitments and Contingencies
Operating Leases
The Company leases facilities under non-cancelable operating lease agreements. These leases have varying terms that range from one to ten years, predominantly no longer than ten years each and contain leasehold improvement incentives, rent holidays and escalation clauses. In addition, some of these leases have renewal options for up to five years. The Company also has contractual commitments to remove leasehold improvements and return certain properties to a specified condition when the leases terminate. At the inception of a lease with such conditions, the Company records an asset retirement obligation liability and a corresponding capital asset in an amount equal to the estimated fair value of the obligation. Asset retirement obligations were $3.0 million and $3.0 million as of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. These obligations are classified as other long-term liabilities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. The Company recorded an insignificant amount and $1.9 million of asset retirement obligation liabilities in 2012 and 2011, respectively.
The Company recognizes rent expense on a straight-line basis over the lease period factoring in leasehold improvement incentives, rent holidays and escalation clauses, and has accrued for rent expense incurred but not paid. Rent expense for all leases was $6.7 million, $6.1 million and $5.1 million for 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The Company did not have any sublease rental income for 2012, 2011 and 2010.
Future annual minimum operating lease payments at December 29, 2012 were as follows (in thousands):
| 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | Thereafter | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Operating lease payments |
$ | 5,790 | $ | 4,900 | $ | 4,808 | $ | 4,339 | $ | 4,212 | $ | 13,263 | $ | 37,312 | ||||||||||||||
82
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Purchase Commitments
The Company has service agreements with its major production suppliers, where the Company is committed to purchase certain parts. These obligations are typically less than the Company’s purchases. As of December 29, 2012, December 31, 2011 and December 25, 2010, these non-cancelable purchase commitments were $52.7 million, $58.8 million and $39.4 million, respectively. Other contracts are related to contractual obligations for non-recurring engineering costs. As of December 29, 2012, December 31, 2011 and December 25, 2010, these other contracts were $6.3 million, $6.2 million and $5.4 million, respectively.
Future purchase commitments at December 29, 2012 were as follows (in thousands):
| 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | Thereafter | Total | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchase obligations |
$ | 52,667 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 52,667 | ||||||||||||||
| Other contracts |
$ | 6,947 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 6,947 | ||||||||||||||
The contractual obligation tables above exclude tax liabilities of $1.8 million related to uncertain tax positions because the Company is unable to determine the timing of settlement if any, of these future payments with a reasonably reliable estimate.
Indemnification Obligations
From time to time, the Company enters into certain types of contracts that contingently require it to indemnify parties against third-party claims. These contracts primarily relate to: (i) certain real estate leases under which the Company may be required to indemnify property owners for environmental and other liabilities, and other claims arising from the Company’s use of the applicable premises; (ii) certain agreements with the Company’s officers, directors and certain key employees, under which the Company may be required to indemnify such persons for liabilities; and (iii) certain provisions in the Company’s customer agreements that may require the Company to indemnify their customers and their affiliated parties against certain liabilities, including if the Company’s products infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights.
The terms of such indemnification obligations vary. Because the maximum obligated amounts under these agreements generally are not explicitly stated, the maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is generally unlimited.
To date, the Company has not incurred any material costs as a result of the indemnification obligations and has not accrued any liabilities related to such obligations in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. The Company has agreed to indemnify Level 3 in connection with the lawsuit filed by Cheetah Omni LLC (“Cheetah”) on May 9, 2006 (see Note 12, “Legal Matters,” to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements). The Company is contractually obligated to indemnify Level 3 for damages suffered by Level 3 to the extent the Company’s product is found to infringe the two Cheetah patents at issue (Patent Nos. 6,795,605 and 7,142,347), and the Company has assumed the defense of this matter. In addition, the Company may be obligated to indemnify the defendants in connection with the lawsuit filed by Cambrian Science Corporation (“Cambrian”) on July 7, 2011, to the extent the Company’s product is found to infringe the Cambrian patent at issue (Patent No. 6,775,312) (see Note 12, “Legal Matters,” to the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements).
As permitted under Delaware law and the Company’s charter and bylaws, the Company has agreements whereby it indemnifies certain of its officers and each of its directors for certain events or occurrences while the officer or director is, or was, serving at the Company’s request in such capacity. The term of the indemnification period is for the officer’s or director’s lifetime. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited; however, the Company has a Director and Officer insurance policy that may reduce its exposure and enable it to recover all or a portion of any future amounts paid. As a result of its insurance policy coverage, the Company believes the estimated fair value of these indemnification agreements is minimal. The Company has no liabilities recorded for these agreements as of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, as this liability is not reasonably estimable even though liability under these agreements is not remote.
83
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
| 11. Guarantees |
Product Warranties
Upon delivery of products, the Company provides for the estimated cost to repair or replace products or the related components that may be returned under hardware warranties. In general, hardware warranty periods range from one to five years. Hardware warranties provide the purchaser with protection in the event that the product does not perform to product specifications. During the warranty period, the purchaser’s sole and exclusive remedy in the event of such defect or failure to perform is limited to the correction of the defect or failure by repair, refurbishment or replacement, at the Company’s sole option and expense. The Company estimates its hardware warranty obligations based on the Company’s historical experience of known product failure rates, use of materials to repair or replace defective products, and service delivery costs incurred in correcting product failures. In addition, from time to time, specific hardware warranty accruals may be made if unforeseen technical problems arise with specific products. Management periodically assesses the adequacy of the Company’s recorded warranty liabilities and adjusts the amounts as necessary.
Activity related to product warranty was as follows (in thousands):
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
|||||||
| Beginning balance |
$ | 12,865 | $ | 11,422 | ||||
| Charges to operations |
15,116 | 9,776 | ||||||
| Utilization |
(7,701 | ) | (7,242 | ) | ||||
| Change in estimate(1) |
(3,798 | ) | (1,091 | ) | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Balance at the end of the period |
$ | 16,482 | $ | 12,865 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| (1) | The Company records hardware warranty liabilities based on the latest quality and cost information available as of that date. The favorable changes in estimate shown here are due to continued improvements in overall actual failure rates and the impact of these improvements on the Company’s estimate of expected future returns and changes in the estimated cost of replacing failed units using either repaired or new units. |
Letters of Credit
The Company had $3.6 million of standby letters of credit outstanding as of December 29, 2012. These consisted of $1.5 million related to a value added tax license, $1.4 million related to a customer proposal guarantee and $0.7 million related to property leases. The Company had $2.7 million of standby letters of credit outstanding as of December 31, 2011. These consisted of $1.4 million related to a customer proposal guarantee, $0.8 million related to a value added tax license and $0.5 million related to property leases.
| 12. Legal | Matters |
Cheetah Patent Infringement Litigation
On May 9, 2006, the Company and Level 3 were sued by Cheetah in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Texarkana Division for alleged infringement of patent no. 6,795,605 (the “‘605 Patent”), and a continuation thereof. On May 16, 2006, Cheetah filed an amended complaint, which requested an order to enjoin the sale of the Company’s DTN platform and to recover all damages caused by the alleged willful infringement including any and all compensatory damages available by law, such as actual and punitive damages, attorneys’ fees, associated interest and Cheetah’s costs incurred in the lawsuit. Cheetah’s complaint does not request a specific dollar amount for these compensatory damages. The Company is contractually obligated to indemnify Level 3 for damages suffered by Level 3 to the extent its product supplied by the Company is found to infringe, and the Company has assumed the defense of this matter. On July 20, 2006, the Company and Level 3 filed an amended response denying all infringement claims under the ‘605 Patent and asserting that the claims of the ‘605 Patent are invalid and that the DTN platform does not infringe the ‘605 Patent. On November 28, 2006, Cheetah
84
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
filed a second amended complaint and added patent no. 7,142,347 (the “‘347 Patent”) to the lawsuit. On December 18, 2006, the Company and Level 3 filed responses to Cheetah’s second amended complaint denying all infringement claims under the ‘347 Patent and the Company and Level 3 asserted counterclaims against Cheetah asserting that the claims are invalid and that the DTN platform does not infringe the patents.
On January 30, 2007, Cheetah filed a third amended complaint adding additional assertions of infringement for the two patents in suit. On February 16, 2007, the Company and Level 3 filed responses to Cheetah’s third amended complaint denying all infringement claims, and the Company and Level 3 asserted counterclaims against Cheetah asserting that the claims of the patents are invalid and that the DTN platform does not infringe the patents.
On March 14, 2007, the Company submitted requests to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (the “U.S. PTO”) for inter partes reexamination of the ‘605 Patent and the ‘347 Patent asking the U.S. PTO to reexamine the patents based on prior art in order to invalidate the patents or limit the scope of each patent’s claims.
On April 12, 2007, the court granted the motion staying all proceedings in the lawsuit. On June 26, 2007, the U.S. PTO also ordered reexamination of the ‘605 Patent and on August 1, 2007, the U.S. PTO ordered reexamination of the ‘347 Patent. As a result, all proceedings in this lawsuit were stayed until the final resolution of these reexaminations.
In a communication the Company received from the U.S. PTO dated December 4, 2009, the Company was advised that various claims in the ‘347 Patent reexamination have been allowed, while other claims have been rejected. In a communication the Company received from the U.S. PTO dated June 22, 2010, the Company was advised that various claims in the ‘605 Patent reexamination have been allowed, while other claims have been rejected.
On March 30, 2012, the Board Patent Appeals Interferences (“BPAI”) affirmed the Examiner’s allowance of certain claims in the reexamination of the ‘347 Patent and ‘605 Patent. The Company filed a request for reconsideration of the BPAI’s decision on April 30, 2012, which was denied in a Decision on Request for Rehearing dated September 27, 2012. The Company has appealed the BPAI’s decision to the Court of Appeals of the Federal Circuit in a Notice of Appeal dated November 26, 2012. On November 9, 2012, Cheetah’s counsel filed another motion requesting the court to lift the stay. The court granted Cheetah’s motion and lifted the stay in an order dated January 8, 2013.
Based on the information available at this time, the Company concluded that the likelihood of a loss with respect to this suit is less than reasonably possible and therefore, a range of loss cannot be provided. As a result, the Company has made no provision for this lawsuit in its financial statements. Factors that the Company considered in the determination of the likelihood of a loss in respect to this matter included the merits of the case, the nature of the litigation (including the complex and technical nature of patent litigation), the length of time the matter has been pending, the status of the re-examination of the underlying patents at issue by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the status of the plaintiff as a non-operating entity, and the lack of any specific amount (or range of amounts) for the alleged damages sought in the complaint.
Cambrian Science Patent Infringement Litigation
On July 12, 2011, the Company was notified by Level 3 that Cambrian filed suit against Level 3 and six other defendants, including Cox Communications, Inc., XO Communications, LLC, Global Crossing Limited, 360Networks (USA), Inc., Integra Telecom, Inc. and IXC, Inc. dba Telekenex (collectively, the “Defendants”) in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California alleging infringement of patent no. 6,775,312 (the “’312 Patent”) and requesting damages for such alleged infringement (the “Cambrian Claim”). The nature of the Cambrian Claim involves allegations of infringement of the ’312 Patent resulting from the Defendants’ use of certain products and systems in the Defendants’ networks, including the Company’s DTN platform. On August 24,
85
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
2011, Cambrian amended the complaint to name the Company as a defendant. The Company assumed the defense of the Cambrian Claim and filed an answer to Cambrian’s complaint on September 21, 2011, in which the Company denied infringement of the ‘312 Patent and raised other defenses. Cambrian filed a second amended complaint on October 6, 2011, which included many of the same allegations as in the original complaint. The Company filed an answer to the second amended complaint on October 21, 2011, in which the Company maintained the same denials and defenses as in its initial answer. On December 23, 2011, the Company filed a motion requesting that the court stay the case with respect to each of the above-noted customer Defendants. Cambrian filed its opposition to the Company’s motion on December 30, 2011. The Company’s request was denied in the court’s decision on March 7, 2012. The Company presented evidence on the appropriate meanings of relevant key words used in the patent claims during a claim construction hearing on November 20, 2012. The Company is awaiting the court’s decision on the meaning of various claim terms.
Based on the information available at this time, the Company concluded that the likelihood of a loss with respect to this suit is less than reasonably possible and therefore, a range of loss cannot be provided. As a result, the Company has made no provision for this lawsuit in its financial statements. Factors that the Company considered in the determination of the likelihood of a loss in respect to this matter included the merits of the case, the nature of the litigation (including the complex and technical nature of patent litigation), the length of time the matter has been pending, and the status of the plaintiff as a non-operating entity.
Loss Contingencies
The Company is subject to the possibility of various losses arising in the ordinary course of business. These may relate to disputes, litigation and other legal actions. In preparation of its quarterly and annual financial statements, the Company considers the likelihood of loss or the incurrence of a liability, including whether it is probable, reasonably possible or remote that a liability has been incurred, as well as the Company’s ability to reasonably estimate the amount of loss, in determining loss contingencies. In accordance with U.S. GAAP, an estimated loss contingency is accrued when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company regularly evaluates current information to determine whether any accruals should be adjusted and whether new accruals are required. As of December 29, 2012, the Company has not accrued or recorded any such material liabilities.
13. Stockholders’ Equity
2000 Stock Plan, 2007 Equity Incentive Plan and Employee Stock Purchase Plan
In December 2000, the Company adopted the 2000 Stock Plan (“2000 Plan”). Under the 2000 Plan, as amended, the Company had reserved an aggregate of 14.2 million shares of its common stock for issuance. As of December 29, 2012, options to purchase 1.7 million shares of the Company’s common stock were outstanding under the 2000 Plan. The Company’s board of directors decided not to grant any additional options or other awards under the 2000 Plan following the Company’s IPO in 2007. The 2000 Plan expired on December 6, 2010. However, the 2000 Plan will continue to govern the terms and conditions of the outstanding options previously granted under the plan.
In February 2007, the Company’s board of directors adopted the 2007 Equity Incentive Plan (“2007 Plan”) and the Company’s stockholders approved the 2007 Plan in May 2007. As of December 29, 2012, the Company reserved a total of 38.2 million shares of common stock for issuance of options, RSUs and PSUs to employees, non-employees and members of the Company’s board of directors, pursuant to the 2007 Plan. The 2007 Plan has a maximum term of 10 years from the date of adoption, or it can be earlier terminated by the Company’s board of directors.
Additionally, in February 2007, the Company’s board of directors adopted, and in May 2007, its stockholders approved the Company’s ESPP. The ESPP has a 20-year term, and as of December 29, 2012, the Company had authorized the issuance of approximately 6.7 million shares of common stock.
86
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Stock Option Exchange Program
On June 11, 2009, the Company’s stockholders approved a one-time stock option exchange program (the “Option Exchange Program”), and on January 25, 2010, the Company launched the Option Exchange Program pursuant to which eligible employees were able to exchange certain outstanding stock options under the Company’s 2007 Plan with an exercise price greater than or equal to $8.16 per share and a grant date on or before January 25, 2009, for a lesser amount of new RSUs or, for new stock options for senior executives. The Option Exchange Program was approved by the Company’s stockholders in June 2009 and was available for employees of the Company residing in the U.S., India and U.K. who held eligible shares. The Option Exchange Program expired on February 22, 2010, and there were 4,926,790 shares tendered for exchange. All surrendered options were cancelled effective as of the expiration of the Option Exchange Program, and immediately thereafter, the Company granted (i) new options with an exercise price of $7.61 per share to purchase an aggregate of 1,564,727 shares of Infinera common stock and (ii) RSUs representing 814,017 shares of Infinera common stock. The Option Exchange Program was an expense neutral exchange and it did not result in any significant incremental stock-based compensation expense.
Equity Incentive Plans
The Company’s stock-based compensation plans include stock options, RSUs, PSUs and employee stock purchases under the Company’s ESPP. As December 29, 2012, there were a total of 13.4 million shares available for grant under the Company’s 2007 Plan. The following tables summarize the Company’s equity award activity and related information (in thousands, except per share data):
| Number of Options |
Weighted-Average Exercise Price Per Share |
Aggregate Intrinsic Value |
||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 26, 2009 |
14,568 | $ | 8.25 | $ | 35,462 | |||||||
| Options granted |
836 | $ | 8.19 | |||||||||
| Options granted in connection with the stock option exchange program |
1,565 | $ | 7.61 | |||||||||
| Options exercised |
(3,094 | ) | $ | 3.85 | $ | 17,538 | ||||||
| Options canceled in connection with the stock option exchange program |
(4,927 | ) | $ | 13.53 | ||||||||
| Options canceled |
(1,133 | ) | $ | 8.28 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 25, 2010 |
7,815 | $ | 6.52 | $ | 30,923 | |||||||
| Options granted |
2,571 | $ | 8.17 | |||||||||
| Options exercised |
(378 | ) | $ | 3.81 | $ | 1,691 | ||||||
| Options canceled |
(135 | ) | $ | 8.63 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 31, 2011 |
9,873 | $ | 7.03 | $ | 7,924 | |||||||
| Options granted |
127 | $ | 7.18 | |||||||||
| Options exercised |
(582 | ) | $ | 4.39 | $ | 1,484 | ||||||
| Options canceled |
(410 | ) | $ | 8.50 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 29, 2012 |
9,008 | $ | 7.13 | $ | 5,726 | |||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Vested and expected to vest as of December 29, 2012 |
8,980 | $ | 5,726 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Exercisable at December 29, 2012 |
7,920 | $ | 7.01 | $ | 5,726 | |||||||
87
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
| Number of Restricted Stock Units |
Weighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share |
Aggregate Intrinsic Value |
||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 26, 2009 |
5,066 | $ | 9.44 | $ | 45,287 | |||||||
| RSUs granted |
2,828 | $ | 8.92 | |||||||||
| RSUs granted in connection with the stock option exchange program |
814 | $ | 7.61 | |||||||||
| RSUs released |
(1,322 | ) | $ | 9.59 | $ | 12,681 | ||||||
| RSUs canceled |
(603 | ) | $ | 9.10 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 25, 2010 |
6,783 | $ | 9.03 | $ | 69,927 | |||||||
| RSUs granted |
2,490 | $ | 8.18 | |||||||||
| RSUs released |
(2,937 | ) | $ | 8.84 | $ | 25,968 | ||||||
| RSUs canceled |
(379 | ) | $ | 8.91 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 31, 2011 |
5,957 | $ | 8.77 | $ | 37,407 | |||||||
| RSUs granted |
3,620 | $ | 7.51 | |||||||||
| RSUs released |
(2,495 | ) | $ | 9.07 | $ | 17,742 | ||||||
| RSUs canceled |
(379 | ) | $ | 8.27 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 29, 2012 |
6,703 | $ | 8.01 | $ | 38,873 | |||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Expected to vest as of December 29, 2012 |
6,529 | $ | 37,868 | |||||||||
| Number of Performance Stock Units |
Weighted-Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share |
Aggregate Intrinsic Value |
||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 26, 2009 |
3,304 | $ | 10.51 | $ | 29,541 | |||||||
| PSUs granted |
0 | $ | 0.00 | |||||||||
| PSUs released |
0 | $ | 0.00 | |||||||||
| PSUs canceled |
(622 | ) | $ | 10.51 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 25, 2010 |
2,682 | $ | 10.51 | $ | 27,660 | |||||||
| PSUs granted |
0 | $ | 0.00 | |||||||||
| PSUs released |
0 | $ | 0.00 | |||||||||
| PSUs canceled |
(87 | ) | $ | 10.43 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 31, 2011 |
2,595 | $ | 10.51 | $ | 16,304 | |||||||
| PSUs granted |
515 | $ | 7.85 | |||||||||
| PSUs released |
(883 | ) | $ | 9.40 | $ | 5,448 | ||||||
| PSUs canceled |
(859 | ) | $ | 10.04 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Outstanding at December 29, 2012 |
1,368 | $ | 10.53 | $ | 7,933 | |||||||
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| Expected to vest as of December 29, 2012 |
681 | $ | 3,950 | |||||||||
The aggregate intrinsic value of unexercised options, unreleased RSUs and PSUs is calculated as the difference between the closing price of the Company’s common stock of $5.80 at December 28, 2012 and the exercise prices of the underlying equity awards. The aggregate intrinsic value of the options which have been exercised and RSUs released is calculated as the difference between the fair market value of the common stock at the date of exercise or release and the exercise price of the underlying equity awards. The aggregate intrinsic value of the options which have been exercised and RSUs released is calculated as the difference between the fair market value of the common stock at the date of exercise or release and the exercise price of the underlying equity awards.
88
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
The following table presents total stock-based compensation cost granted but not yet amortized, net of estimated forfeitures, of the Company’s equity compensation plans as of December 29, 2012, which is expected to be amortized on a straight-line basis over the following weighted-average periods (in thousands, except for weighted-average period):
| Unrecognized Compensation Expense, Net |
Weighted- Average Period (in years) |
|||||||
| Stock options |
$ | 3,886 | 1.4 | |||||
| RSUs |
$ | 30,652 | 1.9 | |||||
| PSUs |
$ | 477 | 0.2 | |||||
The following table summarizes information about options outstanding at December 29, 2012.
| Options Outstanding | Vested and Exercisable Options |
|||||||||||||||||||
| Exercise Price |
Number of Shares |
Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Life |
Weighted- Average Exercise Price |
Number of Shares |
Weighted- Average Exercise Price |
|||||||||||||||
| (In thousands) | (In years) | (In thousands) | ||||||||||||||||||
| $0.76 - $ 4.04 |
1,570 | 3.18 | $ | 2.15 | 1,571 | $ | 2.15 | |||||||||||||
| $6.30 - $ 7.25 |
1,498 | 6.88 | $ | 6.86 | 1,282 | $ | 6.87 | |||||||||||||
| $7.45 - $ 7.61 |
1,615 | 5.37 | $ | 7.53 | 1,469 | $ | 7.52 | |||||||||||||
| $7.68 - $ 8.19 |
1,850 | 5.79 | $ | 8.09 | 1,488 | $ | 8.12 | |||||||||||||
| $8.39 - $ 8.61 |
1,587 | 7.95 | $ | 8.58 | 1,321 | $ | 8.58 | |||||||||||||
| $8.85 - $ 22.36 |
888 | 5.87 | $ | 11.08 | 789 | $ | 11.22 | |||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
| 9,008 | 5.83 | $ | 7.13 | 7,920 | $ | 7.01 | ||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||
Employee Stock Options
In February 2012, the Compensation Committee of the Company’s board of directors shortened the maximum term of future option grants under the 2007 Plan from 10 years to 7 years. During 2012, the Company granted options to employees and members of the Company’s board of directors to purchase an aggregate of 0.1 million shares of common stock at a weighted-average price of $7.18 per share. These options have exercise prices equal to the closing market prices of the Company’s common stock on the dates these options were granted. The weighted-average remaining contractual term of options exercisable was 5.6 years as of December 29, 2012. Total fair value of stock options granted to employees and directors that vested during 2012 and 2011 was approximately $10.0 million and $9.0 million, respectively, based on the grant date fair value.
Excluding options granted in connection with the Company’s one-time stock option exchange program, which occurred in fiscal 2010, the ranges of estimated values of stock options and performance-based stock options granted, as well as ranges of assumptions used in calculating these values were based on estimates as follows:
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Volatility |
65% - 68% | 58% - 62% | 56% - 61% | |||||||||
| Risk-free interest rate |
0.7% - 1.0% | 1.7% - 2.6% | 1.4% - 2.9% | |||||||||
| Expected life |
4.0 - 5.3 years | 4.6 - 5.5 years | 4.8 - 5.4 years | |||||||||
| Estimated fair value |
$3.75 - $3.76 | $3.47 - $4.63 | $3.32 - $5.72 | |||||||||
| Total stock-based compensation expense (in thousands) |
$ | 8,436 | $ | 12,590 | $ | 14,904 | ||||||
89
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Employee Stock Purchase Plan
The fair value of the ESPP shares was estimated at the date of grant using the following assumptions:
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Volatility |
54% - 57% | 51% - 66% | 45% - 55% | |||||||||
| Risk-free interest rate |
0.16% - 0.17% | 0.12% - 0.20% | 0.20% - 0.23% | |||||||||
| Expected life |
0.5 years | 0.5 years | 0.5 years | |||||||||
| Estimated fair value |
$1.73 - $2.63 | $2.09 - $2.70 | $2.13 - $2.58 | |||||||||
The Company’s ESPP activity for the following periods was as follows (in thousands):
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Stock-based compensation expense |
$ | 3,586 | $ | 3,561 | $ | 2,802 | ||||||
| Employee contributions |
$ | 9,030 | $ | 8,459 | $ | 7,562 | ||||||
| Shares purchased |
1,653 | 1,309 | 1,207 | |||||||||
As of December 29, 2012, there were approximately 0.5 million shares available for grant under the ESPP.
Restricted Stock Units
During 2012 , 2011 and 2010, the Company granted RSUs to employees and members of the Company’s board of directors to receive an aggregate of 3.6 million, 2.5 million and 3.6 million shares of the Company’s common stock, respectively, at no cost. Included in the RSUs granted in 2010 are 0.8 million shares granted in connection with the Option Exchange Program. The Company accounted for the fair value of the RSUs using the closing market price of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant. Amortization of RSU stock-based compensation in 2012, 2011 and 2010 was approximately $27.9 million, $25.5 million and $23.8 million, respectively.
Performance Stock Units
During 2009, the Company granted PSUs primarily to members of the Company’s board of directors and executive officers. The number of shares to be issued upon vesting of PSUs range from 0.5 to 2.0 times the number of PSUs granted depending on the relative performance of the Company’s common stock price compared to the NASDAQ Composite Index over a three-year or four-year period. During 2012, the Company released 0.7 million of PSUs based on a payout of 0.5 of the target number of PSUs. As of December 29, 2012, 0.9 million PSUs granted in 2009 remained outstanding and were scheduled to vest on December 31, 2012, subject to the performance criteria set forth above.
Pursuant to the Company’s 2007 Equity Incentive Plan, during 2012, the Company granted 0.5 million PSUs to certain of the Company’s executive officers. These PSUs will only vest upon the achievement of certain specific revenue and operating profit criteria and are subject to each named executive officer’s continued service to the Company. If the financial performance metrics are not met within the time limits specified in the award agreements, the PSUs will be cancelled.
Amortization of stock-based compensation related to PSUs in 2012, 2011 and 2010 was approximately $3.3 million, $9.2 million and $7.6 million, respectively.
Common Stock Warrants
As of December 29, 2012, there were warrants to purchase 92,592 shares of common stock outstanding with an exercise price of $5.40 per share and an expiration date of July 13, 2013.
90
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Stock-based Compensation Expense
The following tables summarize the effects of stock-based compensation on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets and statements of operations for the periods presented (in thousands):
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Stock-based compensation effects in inventory |
$ | 4,891 | $ | 3,479 | $ | 2,497 | ||||||
| Stock-based compensation effects in deferred inventory cost |
$ | 42 | $ | 179 | $ | 287 | ||||||
| Stock-based compensation effects in fixed assets |
$ | 146 | $ | 36 | $ | 0 | ||||||
| Stock-based compensation effects in net loss before income taxes |
||||||||||||
| Cost of revenue |
$ | 2,710 | $ | 2,923 | $ | 2,598 | ||||||
| Research and development |
13,306 | 14,990 | 14,301 | |||||||||
| Sales and marketing |
10,450 | 8,818 | 7,896 | |||||||||
| General and administrative |
9,529 | 18,502 | 19,903 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| 35,995 | 45,233 | 44,698 | ||||||||||
| Cost of revenue—amortization from balance sheet (1) |
5,824 | 4,924 | 5,637 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total stock-based compensation expense |
$ | 41,819 | $ | 50,157 | $ | 50,335 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| (1) | Represents stock-based compensation expense deferred to inventory and deferred inventory costs in prior periods and recognized in the current period. |
Shares Reserved for Future Issuances
Common stock reserved for future issuance was as follows (in thousands):
| December 29, 2012 |
||||
| Outstanding stock options and awards |
17,079 | |||
| Reserved for future option and award grants |
13,372 | |||
| Reserved for future ESPP |
531 | |||
|
|
|
|||
| Total common stock reserved for stock options and awards |
30,982 | |||
| Warrants to purchase common stock |
93 | |||
|
|
|
|||
| Total common stock reserved for future issuances |
31,075 | |||
|
|
|
|||
91
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
14. Income Taxes
The following is a geographic breakdown of the provision for (benefit from) income taxes (in thousands):
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Current: |
||||||||||||
| Federal |
$ | (133 | ) | $ | (107 | ) | $ | (264 | ) | |||
| State |
22 | 213 | (17 | ) | ||||||||
| Foreign |
2,169 | 1,841 | 790 | |||||||||
| Total current |
$ | 2,058 | $ | 1,947 | $ | 509 | ||||||
| Deferred: |
||||||||||||
| Federal |
$ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | (200 | ) | |||||
| State |
0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||
| Foreign |
132 | (256 | ) | 8 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total deferred |
$ | 132 | $ | (256 | ) | $ | (192 | ) | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total provision |
$ | 2,190 | $ | 1,691 | $ | 317 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Income before provision for income taxes from international operations was $5.5 million, $5.3 million and $3.5 million for the years ended December 29, 2012, December 31, 2011 and December 25, 2010, respectively.
The provisions for income taxes differ from the amount computed by applying the statutory federal income tax rates as follows:
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Expected tax benefit at federal statutory rate |
35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | 35.0 | % | ||||||
| State taxes, net of federal benefit |
0.0 | % | (0.1 | )% | (0.1 | )% | ||||||
| Research credits |
0.0 | % | 2.9 | % | 9.4 | % | ||||||
| Stock-based compensation |
(3.9 | )% | (4.1 | )% | (7.5 | )% | ||||||
| Change in valuation allowance |
(33.5 | )% | (36.1 | )% | (40.6 | )% | ||||||
| Other |
(0.2 | )% | 0.3 | % | 2.7 | % | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Effective tax rate |
(2.6 | )% | (2.1 | )% | (1.1 | )% | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
The Company recognized income tax expense of approximately $2.2 million, $1.7 million and $0.3 million in each of fiscal years 2012, 2011, and 2010, on pre-tax book losses of $83.1 million, $80.1 million, and $27.6 million, respectively. The resulting effective tax rates of 2.6%, 2.1%, and 1.1% for 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively, differs from the expected statutory rate of 35% based upon unbenefited U.S. losses, non-deductible stock compensation charges and foreign taxes provided on foreign subsidiary earnings. The increase in the 2012 and 2011 tax expense compared to the 2010 tax expense relates primarily to the expiration of the India tax holiday as well as an increase in India transfer pricing reserves, in accordance to Accounting Standards Codification 740, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes. The Company’s India subsidiary operated under a tax holiday which expired on March 31, 2011 and the net impact of this tax holiday in prior years was to decrease the Company’s net loss by approximately $0.5 million in 2010, resulting in no earnings per share impact in that year. Further, the increase in tax expense in 2012 compared to 2011 relates to reductions of benefits from Canadian research credits.
During 2012, 2011 and 2010, income tax benefits of zero, $0.1 million and $0.3 million for each year were allocated to the tax provision from continuing operations, related to the tax effects of items credited directly to other
92
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
comprehensive income (“OCI”). Generally, the amount of tax expense or benefit allocated to continuing operations is determined without regard to the tax effects of other categories of income or loss, such as OCI. However, an exception to the general rule is provided within the intra-period tax allocations rules when there is a pre-tax loss from continuing operations and there are items charged or credited to other categories, including OCI, in the current year. The intra-period tax allocation rules related to items charged or credited directly to OCI can result in disproportionate tax effects that remain in OCI until certain events occur.
Deferred income taxes reflect the net effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes. Significant components of the Company’s deferred tax assets are as follows (in thousands):
| Years Ended | ||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
|||||||
| Deferred tax assets: |
||||||||
| Net operating losses |
$ | 120,022 | $ | 92,951 | ||||
| Research credits |
29,092 | 26,326 | ||||||
| Nondeductible accruals |
31,354 | 29,836 | ||||||
| Property, plant and equipment |
3,226 | 2,007 | ||||||
| Intangible assets |
4,871 | 9,453 | ||||||
| Stock-based compensation |
25,040 | 27,949 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total deferred tax assets |
$ | 213,605 | $ | 188,522 | ||||
| Valuation allowance |
(213,449 | ) | (188,351 | ) | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Net deferred tax assets |
$ | 156 | $ | 171 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Deferred tax liabilities: |
||||||||
| Depreciation |
(117 | ) | 0 | |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total deferred tax liabilities |
$ | (117 | ) | $ | 0 | |||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Net deferred tax assets |
$ | 39 | $ | 171 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
The realization of tax benefits of deferred tax assets is dependent upon future levels of taxable income, of an appropriate character, in the periods the items are scheduled to be deductible or taxable. Based on the available objective evidence, management believes it is more likely than not that the domestic net deferred tax assets will not be realizable. Accordingly, the Company has provided a full valuation allowance against its domestic deferred tax assets, net of deferred tax liabilities, as of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011. The valuation allowance for deferred tax assets as of December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011 was $213.4 million and $188.4 million, respectively. The net change in the valuation allowance was an increase of $25.1 million and $32.5 million for the years ended December 29, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.
As of December 29, 2012, the Company has net operating loss carryforwards of approximately $338.4 million for federal tax purposes and $297.7 million for state tax purposes. If not utilized, these carryforwards will begin to expire in 2021 for federal tax purposes and 2015 for state tax purposes. Additionally, the Company has federal and California research and development credits available to reduce future income taxes payable of approximately $22.9 million, respectively. The federal research credits will begin to expire in the year 2021 if not utilized, while the California research credits have no expiration date.
The Company maintains net operating losses generated from excess tax benefits associated with the accumulated stock award attributes in a memo account, not included in the deferred tax inventory balances. The additional tax benefit associated with these stock award attributes, of which the net operating loss amounts are included in the carryforward amounts noted above, is not recognized until the deduction reduces cash taxes payable. At December 29, 2012, the Company had unbenefited stock option deductions for federal and California tax purposes of $36.8 million and $35.6 million, respectively. When utilized, the estimated tax benefits of approximately $14.7 million will result in a credit to stockholders’ equity.
93
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
Under the Tax Reform Act of 1986, the amount of benefit from net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards may be impaired or limited in certain circumstances. Events which cause limitations in the amount of net operating losses that the Company may utilize in any one year include, but are not limited to, a cumulative ownership change of more than 50 percent as defined, over a three-year testing period. As of December 29, 2012, the Company has determined that ownership changes have occurred that would result in limitations on the current and future utilization of its net operating loss carryforwards. However, based on the work performed, the limitations are not significant enough to impact the future utilization of the tax attributes.
The Company’s policy with respect to its undistributed foreign subsidiaries’ earnings is to consider those earnings to be indefinitely reinvested and, accordingly, no related provision for U.S. federal and state income taxes has been provided. Upon distribution of those earnings in the form of dividends or otherwise, the Company may be subject to both U.S. income taxes (subject to an adjustment for foreign tax credits) and withholding taxes in the various foreign countries. At December 29, 2012, the undistributed earnings approximated $15.6 million. The future tax consequence of the remittance of these earnings is negligible because of the significant net operating loss carryforwards for U.S. and state purposes and full valuation allowance provided against such carryforwards.
The aggregate changes in the balance of gross unrecognized tax benefits were as follows (in thousands):
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Beginning balance |
$ | 13,066 | $ | 8,970 | $ | 8,295 | ||||||
| Tax position related to current year: |
||||||||||||
| Additions |
1,437 | 2,759 | 1,055 | |||||||||
| Tax positions related to prior years |
||||||||||||
| Additions |
75 | 1,810 | 55 | |||||||||
| Reductions |
(580 | ) | (210 | ) | (402 | ) | ||||||
| Lapses of statute of limitations |
(96 | ) | (263 | ) | (33 | ) | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Ending balance |
$ | 13,902 | $ | 13,066 | $ | 8,970 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
As of December 29, 2012, the cumulative unrecognized tax benefit was $13.9 million, of which $12.3 million was netted against deferred tax assets, which would have otherwise been subjected with a full valuation allowance. Of the total unrecognized tax benefit as of December 29, 2012, approximately $1.6 million, if recognized, would impact the Company’s effective tax rate.
As of December 29, 2012, December 31, 2011 and December 25, 2010, the Company had $0.2 million each year of accrued interest or penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits, respectively, of which less than $0.1 million was included in the Company’s provision for income taxes each for the years ended December 29, 2012, December 31, 2011 and December 25, 2010.
The Company’s policy is to include interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits within the Company’s provision for income taxes.
The Company is potentially subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service and the relevant state income taxing authorities under the statute of limitations for years 2001 and forward.
The Company has received assessments of tax resulting from a transfer pricing examinations in India for fiscal years ending March 31, 2005 through March 31, 2008. The Company is appealing the assessment and does not expect a significant adjustment to unrecognized tax benefits as a result of this inquiry. Fiscal years subsequent to March 2008 remain open to examination in India.
94
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
The Company does not currently believe there to be a reasonable possibility of a significant change in total unrecognized tax benefits that would occur within the next 12 months and, as such, amounts are classified as other long-term liabilities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets as of December 29, 2012.
15. Segment Information
Operating segments are defined as components of an enterprise about which separate financial information is available that is evaluated regularly by the chief operating decision maker, or decision making group, in deciding how to allocate resources and in assessing performance. The Company’s chief operating decision maker is the Company’s chief executive officer. The Company’s chief executive officer reviews financial information presented on a consolidated basis, accompanied by information about revenue by geographic region for purposes of allocating resources and evaluating financial performance. The Company has one business activity, and there are no segment managers who are held accountable for operations, operating results and plans for levels or components below the consolidated unit level. Accordingly, the Company is considered to be in a single reporting segment and operating unit structure.
Revenue by geographic region is based on the shipping address of the customer. The following tables set forth revenue and long-lived assets by geographic region (in thousands):
Revenue
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| Americas: |
||||||||||||
| United States |
$ | 296,849 | $ | 283,443 | $ | 342,461 | ||||||
| Other Americas |
11,811 | 11,543 | 16,162 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| $ | 308,660 | $ | 294,986 | $ | 358,623 | |||||||
| Europe, Middle East and Africa |
116,663 | 93,428 | 84,786 | |||||||||
| Asia Pacific |
13,114 | 16,463 | 10,943 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Total revenue |
$ | 438,437 | $ | 404,877 | $ | 454,352 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Property, plant and equipment, net
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
|||||||
| United States |
$ | 78,309 | $ | 74,340 | ||||
| Other Americas |
222 | 230 | ||||||
| Asia Pacific |
1,812 | 2,183 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Total property, plant and equipment, net |
$ | 80,343 | $ | 76,753 | ||||
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
16. Employee Benefit Plan
In July 2001, the Company’s board of directors approved the adoption of a savings plan under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code (the “Plan”). As allowed under Section 401(k) of the Internal Revenue Code, the Plan provides tax-deferred salary contributions for eligible U.S. employees. Employee contributions are limited to a maximum annual amount as set periodically by the Internal Revenue Code. Expenses related to the Company’s 401(k) plan were insignificant for 2012, 2011 and 2010.
95
Table of Contents
INFINERA CORPORATION
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS—(Continued)
17. Financial Information by Quarter (Unaudited)
The following table sets forth the Company’s unaudited quarterly consolidated statements of operations data for each of the eight quarters ended December 29, 2012. The data has been prepared on the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included in this report and you should read the following table in conjunction with such financial statements. The table includes all necessary adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments that the Company considers necessary for a fair presentation of this data. The results of historical periods are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations for a full year or any future period.
| For the Three Months Ended (Unaudited) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
2012 |
|
2011 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Dec. 29 | Sep. 29 | Jun. 30 | Mar. 31 | Dec. 31 | Sep. 24 | Jun. 25 | Mar. 26 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| (In thousands, except per share data) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Revenue: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Product |
$ | 109,051 | $ | 98,853 | $ | 77,843 | $ | 92,391 | $ | 93,025 | $ | 89,554 | $ | 84,361 | $ | 82,528 | ||||||||||||||||
| Ratable product and related support and services |
393 | 450 | 523 | 531 | 593 | 847 | 814 | 922 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Services |
18,620 | 12,911 | 15,092 | 11,779 | 18,391 | 13,621 | 10,781 | 9,440 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Total revenue |
128,064 | 112,214 | 93,458 | 104,701 | 112,009 | 104,022 | 95,956 | 92,890 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cost of revenue: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cost of product |
77,023 | 66,510 | 56,017 | 59,324 | 61,103 | 57,449 | 54,540 | 46,618 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cost of ratable product and related support and services |
104 | 102 | 166 | 191 | 250 | 167 | 294 | 385 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cost of services |
7,669 | 4,102 | 4,901 | 4,759 | 5,972 | 5,757 | 3,708 | 3,143 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Total cost of revenue |
84,796 | 70,714 | 61,084 | 64,274 | 67,325 | 63,373 | 58,542 | 50,146 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Gross profit |
43,268 | 41,500 | 32,374 | 40,427 | 44,684 | 40,649 | 37,414 | 42,744 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Operating expenses |
58,781 | 59,705 | 61,773 | 60,311 | 63,544 | 62,351 | 61,491 | 58,753 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Loss from operations |
(15,513 | ) | (18,205 | ) | (29,399 | ) | (19,884 | ) | (18,860 | ) | (21,702 | ) | (24,077 | ) | (16,009 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Other income (expense), net |
75 | (442 | ) | 377 | (149 | ) | 56 | 393 | 245 | (99 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Loss before income taxes |
(15,438 | ) | (18,647 | ) | (29,022 | ) | (20,033 | ) | (18,804 | ) | (21,309 | ) | (23,832 | ) | (16,108 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
| Provision for income taxes |
650 | 434 | 527 | 579 | 546 | 497 | 362 | 286 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Net loss |
$ | (16,088 | ) | $ | (19,081 | ) | $ | (29,549 | ) | $ | (20,612 | ) | $ | (19,350 | ) | $ | (21,806 | ) | $ | (24,194 | ) | $ | (16,394 | ) | ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Net loss per common share |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Basic |
$ | (0.14 | ) | $ | (0.17 | ) | $ | (0.27 | ) | $ | (0.19 | ) | $ | (0.18 | ) | $ | (0.21 | ) | $ | (0.23 | ) | $ | (0.16 | ) | ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
| Diluted |
$ | (0.14 | ) | $ | (0.17 | ) | $ | (0.27 | ) | $ | (0.19 | ) | $ | (0.18 | ) | $ | (0.21 | ) | $ | (0.23 | ) | $ | (0.16 | ) | ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||
The Company’s operating results may fluctuate due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of the Company’s control. As a result, comparing the Company’s operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. You should not rely on the Company’s past results as an indication of its future performance.
The Company operates and reports financial results on a fiscal year of 52 or 53 weeks ending on the last Saturday of December in each year. Accordingly, fiscal year 2012 was a 52-week year that ended on December 29, 2012. The quarters ended March 31, June 30, September 29, and December 29, 2012 were 13-week quarters. Fiscal year 2011 was a 53-week year that ended on December 31, 2011. The quarters ended March 26, June 25, and September 24, 2011 were 13-week quarters and the quarter ended December 31, 2011 was a 14-week quarter.
96
Table of Contents
| ITEM 9. | CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE |
None.
| ITEM 9A. | CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES |
Attached as exhibits to this Form 10-K are certifications of our Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), which are required in accordance with Rule 13a-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“the Exchange Act”). This “Controls and Procedures” section includes information concerning the internal controls and controls evaluation referred to in the certifications.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
An evaluation was performed by management, with the participation of our chief executive officer (“CEO”) and our chief financial officer (“CFO”), of the effectiveness 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 (the “Exchange Act”)). Disclosure controls and procedures are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. Based on this evaluation, our CEO and CFO have concluded that, as of the end of the fiscal period covered by this annual report on Form 10-K, our disclosure controls and procedures were effective to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by us in reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified by the SEC’s rules and forms and that such information is accumulated and communicated to management, including the CEO and CFO, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
We maintain a system of internal control over financial reporting that is designed to provide reasonable assurance that our books and records accurately reflect transactions and that established policies and procedures are followed. We implemented an enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) system during the third quarter of 2012, which resulted in a change to our system of internal control over financial reporting.
We have implemented the ERP system to improve standardization and automation, and not in response to a deficiency in our internal control over financial reporting. We believe that the implementation of the ERP system and related changes to internal controls will enhance our internal controls over financial reporting while providing the ability to scale our business. We have taken the necessary steps to monitor and maintain appropriate internal controls over financial reporting during this period of change and will continue to evaluate the operating effectiveness of related key controls during subsequent periods.
Except as described above, there were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the most recently completed fiscal year ended December 29, 2012 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our management, including our CEO and CFO, is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of our financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
Management assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 29, 2012, the end of our fiscal year. Management based its assessment on the framework established in Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”). Management’s assessment included evaluation of such elements such as the design and operating
97
Table of Contents
effectiveness of key financial reporting controls, process documentation, accounting policies, and our overall control environment. This assessment is supported by testing and monitoring performed by our internal audit and finance personnel.
Based on our assessment, management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 29, 2012, the end of the Company’s fiscal year, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external reporting purposes in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
Our independent registered public accounting firm, Ernst & Young LLP, has issued an audit report on our internal control over financial reporting, which appears in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Inherent Limitations of Internal Controls
Our management, including our CEO and CFO, does not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures or our internal controls will prevent all error and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within us have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of a simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the control. The design of any system of controls also is 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 the 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.
| ITEM 9B. | OTHER INFORMATION |
None.
98
Table of Contents
| ITEM 10. | DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE |
The information required by this item with respect to our directors and executive officers is incorporated by reference to the information set forth in our proxy statement for the 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Commission within 120 days after the end of Infinera’s fiscal year ended December 29, 2012. For information pertaining to our executive offers and directors, refer to the “Executive Officers and Directors” section of Part 1, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
As part of our system of corporate governance, our board of directors has adopted a code of business conduct and ethics. The code applies to all of our employees, officers (including our principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions), agents and representatives, including our independent directors and consultants, who are not employees of Infinera, with regard to their Infinera-related activities. The full text of our code of business conduct and ethics is posted on our web site at http://www.infinera.com . We intend to disclose future amendments to certain provisions of our code of business conduct and ethics, or waivers of such provisions, applicable to any principal executive officer, principal financial officer, principal accounting officer or controller, or persons performing similar functions or our directors on our web site identified above. The inclusion of our web site address in this report does not include or incorporate by reference the information on our web site into this report.
| ITEM 11. | EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION |
Information responsive to this item is incorporated herein by reference to our definitive proxy statement with respect to our 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
| ITEM 12. | SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS |
Information responsive to this item is incorporated herein by reference to our definitive proxy statement with respect to our 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
| ITEM 13. | CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE |
Information responsive to this item is incorporated herein by reference to our definitive proxy statement with respect to our 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
| ITEM 14. | PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES |
Information responsive to this item is incorporated herein by reference to our definitive proxy statement with respect to our 2013 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
99
Table of Contents
| ITEM 15. | EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES |
(a)(1) Consolidated Financial Statements
This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains the following financial statements which appear under Part II, Item 8 of this Form 10-K on the pages noted below:
| Page | ||||
| Reports of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm |
56 | |||
| 58 | ||||
| 59 | ||||
| 60 | ||||
| 61 | ||||
| 63 | ||||
| 64 | ||||
(a)(2) Financial Statement Schedule
Schedule II: Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
| Years Ended | ||||||||||||
| December 29, 2012 |
December 31, 2011 |
December 25, 2010 |
||||||||||
| (In thousands) | ||||||||||||
| Deferred tax asset, valuation allowance |
||||||||||||
| Beginning balance |
$ | 188,351 | $ | 155,847 | $ | 142,420 | ||||||
| Additions |
25,098 | 32,504 | 13,427 | |||||||||
| Reductions |
0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Ending balance |
$ | 213,449 | $ | 188,351 | $ | 155,847 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Allowance for doubtful accounts |
||||||||||||
| Beginning balance |
$ | 0 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | ||||||
| Additions |
94 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||
| Reductions |
0 | 0 | 0 | |||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Ending balance |
$ | 94 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Provision for other receivables |
||||||||||||
| Beginning balance |
$ | 563 | $ | 0 | $ | 0 | ||||||
| Additions |
0 | 563 | 0 | |||||||||
| Reductions |
(563 | ) | 0 | 0 | ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| Ending balance |
$ | 0 | $ | 563 | $ | 0 | ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
Schedules not listed above have been omitted because the information required to be set forth therein is not applicable or is shown in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.
(a)(3) Exhibits.
See Index to Exhibits. The Exhibits listed in the accompanying Index to Exhibits are filed or incorporated by reference as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
100
Table of Contents
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
| Exhibit No. |
Description | |
| 3.1 | Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation. (1) | |
| 3.2 | Amended and Restated Bylaws. (2) | |
| 4.1 | Form of Common Stock Certificate. (3) | |
| 10.1* | Form of Indemnification Agreement between Registrant and each of its directors and executive officers. (4) | |
| 10.2* | 2000 Stock Plan, as amended, and forms of stock option agreements thereunder. (4) | |
| 10.3* | 2007 Equity Incentive Plan. (4) | |
| 10.4* | 2007 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. (4) | |
| 10.5* | Bonus Plan. (5) | |
| 10.6* | Form of Section 16 Officer Restricted Stock Unit Agreement under the 2007 Equity Incentive Plan. (6) | |
| 10.7* | Form of Section 16 Officer Performance Share Agreement under the 2007 Equity Incentive Plan. (6) | |
| 10.8* | Form of Stock Option Agreement under the 2007 Equity Incentive Plan. (7) | |
| 10.9* | Form of Annual Performance Share Agreement for the Board of Directors under the 2007 Equity Incentive Plan. (8) | |
| 10.10* | Form of CEO Amended and Restated Change of Control Severance Agreement. | |
| 10.11* | Form of Section 16 Officer Amended and Restated Change of Control Severance Agreement. | |
| 14.1 | Code of Ethics. (9) | |
| 21.1 | Subsidiaries. | |
| 23.1 | Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. | |
| 31.1 | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | |
| 31.2 | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) and Rule 15d-14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | |
| 32.1** | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | |
| 32.2** | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. | |
| 101.INS*** | XBRL Instance Document | |
| 101.SCH*** | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document | |
| 101.CAL*** | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document | |
| 101.DEF*** | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document | |
| 101.LAB*** | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document | |
| 101.PRE*** | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document | |
101
Table of Contents
| * | Management contracts or compensation plans or arrangements in which directors or executive officers are eligible to participate. |
| ** | This exhibit shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filings under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Act of 1934, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language in any filings. |
| *** | XBRL information is furnished and not filed for purposes of Sections 11 and 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and is not subject to liability under those sections, is not part of any registration statement or prospectus to which it relates and is not incorporated or deemed to be incorporated by reference into any registration statement, prospectus or other document. |
| (1) | Incorporated by reference to exhibit filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K (No. 001-33486), filed with the SEC on June 12, 2007. |
| (2) | Incorporated by reference to exhibit filed with Registrant’s Current Report on Form 8-K (No. 001-33486), filed with the SEC on February 17, 2009. |
| (3) | Incorporated by reference to exhibit filed with Registrant’s Form S-1/A (No. 333-140876), filed with the SEC on April 27, 2007. |
| (4) | Incorporated by reference to exhibit filed with Registrant’s Form S-1 (No. 333-140876), filed with the SEC on February 26, 2007. |
| (5) | Incorporated by reference to exhibit filed with Registrant’s Current Report on 8-K (No. 001-33486), filed with the SEC on February 14, 2011. |
| (6) | Incorporated by reference to exhibit filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (No. 001-33486), filed with the SEC on November 2, 2010. |
| (7) | Incorporated by reference to exhibit filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (No. 001-33486), filed with the SEC on May 5, 2010. |
| (8) | Incorporated by reference to exhibit filed with Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (No. 001-33486), filed with the SEC on May 7, 2009. |
| (9) | Incorporated by reference to exhibit filed with Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K (No. 001-33486), filed with the SEC on February 19, 2008. |
102
Table of Contents
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
Dated: March 5, 2013
| Infinera Corporation Registrant | ||
| By: | /s/ ITA M. BRENNAN | |
| Ita M. Brennan Chief Financial Officer Principal Financial and Accounting Officer | ||
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.
| /S/ THOMAS J. FALLON |
/s/ KAMBIZ Y. HOOSHMAND | |
| Thomas J. Fallon President, Chief Executive Officer and Director and Principal Executive Officer March 5, 2013 |
Kambiz Y. Hooshmand Chairman of the Board March 5, 2013 | |
| /s/ ITA M. BRENNAN |
/s/ KENNETH A. GOLDMAN | |
| Ita M. Brennan Chief Financial Officer, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer March 5, 2013 |
Kenneth A. Goldman Director March 5, 2013 | |
| /s/ DAVID F. WELCH, PH.D. |
/s/ DAN MAYDAN, PH.D. | |
| David F. Welch, Ph.D. Co-founder, Executive Vice President, Chief Strategy Officer and Director March 5, 2013 |
Dan Maydan, Ph.D. Director March 5, 2013 | |
| /s/ PHILIP J. KOEN |
/s/ PAUL J. MILBURY | |
| Philip J. Koen Director March 5, 2013 |
Paul J. Milbury Director March 5, 2013 | |
| /s/ CARL REDFIELD |
/s/ MARK A. WEGLEITNER | |
| Carl Redfield Director March 5, 2013 |
Mark A. Wegleitner Director March 5, 2013 | |
103