e10vk
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C.
20549
FORM 10-K
|
|
|
|
|
þ ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
|
|
|
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For The Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
o TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
|
|
|
OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
|
For the Transition Period
from
to
|
Commission File Number 0-17795
CIRRUS LOGIC, INC.
|
|
|
DELAWARE
|
|
77-0024818
|
(State of
incorporation)
|
|
(I.R.S.
ID)
|
2901 Via
Fortuna, Austin, TX 78746
(512) 851-4000
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
None
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the
Act:
Common Stock, $0.001 Par Value
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the
Act. YES o NO þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the
Act. YES o NO þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has
filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the
registrant was required to file such reports); and (2) has
been subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. YES þ NO o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein and will not be contained, to the best
of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated
filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large
accelerated filer in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange Act. (Check One):
Large
accelerated
filer o Accelerated
filer þ Non-accelerated
filer o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the
Act). YES o NO þ
The aggregate market value of the registrants voting and
non-voting stock held by non-affiliates was approximately
$400 million based upon the closing price reported on the
NASDAQ Global Select Market as of September 23, 2006.
As of May 29, 2007, the number of outstanding shares of the
registrants Common Stock, $0.001 par value, was
88,740,292.
DOCUMENTS
INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Certain information contained in the registrants proxy
statement for its annual meeting of stockholders to be held
July 27, 2007 is incorporated by reference in Part III
of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Page 1 of 65
CIRRUS
LOGIC, INC.
FORM 10-K
For The Fiscal Year Ended March 31, 2007
INDEX
Page 2 of 65
PART I
Cirrus Logic, Inc. (Cirrus Logic,
Cirrus, We, Us,
Our, or the Company) develops
high-precision, analog and mixed-signal integrated circuits
(ICs) for a broad range of consumer and industrial
markets. Building on our diverse analog mixed-signal patent
portfolio, Cirrus Logic delivers highly optimized products for
consumer and commercial audio, automotive entertainment and
industrial applications. We develop and market ICs and embedded
software used by original equipment manufacturers. We also
provide complete system reference designs based on our
technology that enable our customers to bring products to market
in a timely and cost-effective manner.
We were founded in 1984 and were reincorporated in the State of
Delaware in February 1999. Our headquarters and engineering
facility are in Austin, Texas with design centers in Beijing and
Shanghai in the Peoples Republic of China and sales
locations throughout the United States. We also serve customers
from international sales offices in Europe and Asia, including
the Peoples Republic of China, Hong Kong, South Korea,
Japan, Singapore and Taiwan. Our common stock, which has been
publicly traded since 1989, is listed on the NASDAQ Global
Select Market under the symbol CRUS.
We maintain a Web site with the address www.cirrus.com.
We are not including the information contained on our Web site
as a part of, or incorporating it by reference into, this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K.
We make available free of charge through our Web site our Annual
Reports on
Form 10-K,
Quarterly Reports on
Form 10-Q
and Current Reports on
Form 8-K
and amendments to these reports, as soon as reasonably
practicable after we electronically file such material with, or
furnish such material to, the Securities and Exchange Commission
(the Commission). To receive a free copy of this
Form 10-K,
please forward your written request to Cirrus Logic, Inc., Attn:
Investor Relations, 2901 Via Fortuna, Austin, Texas 78746, or
via email at InvestorRelations@cirrus.com.
Background
of the Semiconductor Industry
In general, the semiconductor industry produces three types of
products: analog, digital and mixed-signal. Analog
semiconductors process a continuous range of values that can
regulate functions such as temperature, speed, sound, video
images and electrical current. Digital semiconductors process
discrete values, for example, two values, such as 0s and 1s,
used by computers. Mixed-signal semiconductors combine analog
and digital functions in a single product.
In the consumer electronics industry, audio soundtracks and
video images were originally transmitted, edited and stored
almost exclusively using analog formats. Given advances in
technology, audio and video now can be stored in digital format.
This format allows for the manipulation of audio and video
signals through digital signal processors (DSPs).
With digital signal processors, digital audio and digital video
signals can be compressed, improving storage and efficiencies in
transmissions and they can be transmitted and reproduced without
degradation in the sound or images. The digital format also
allows for greater security from unauthorized copying, better
editing capabilities and random access to data.
In addition, increasing advances in semiconductor technology are
resulting in the convergence of consumer electronics products,
which means cost savings, added convenience, and functionality
for consumers. For example, compact disc (CD)
players were introduced to play audio content in the CD format
only. Later, digital video disc (DVD) players were
introduced, combining audio with video. These consumer
electronics products now support additional audio and video
formats, such as MP3 audio and MPEG-4 video. As these digital
home entertainment systems have converged and have become
increasingly complex, a need has arisen among makers of these
systems for sophisticated IC chips that have many features and
are cost-effective.
Manufacturers of consumer electronics products also face
expedited
time-to-market
demands and, because analog or mixed-signal IC design is a
specialized field of IC design, manufacturers increasingly are
asking third parties to provide advanced, analog or mixed-signal
ICs. The design of the analog component of a mixed-signal IC is
complex and difficult, and requires engineers to optimize speed,
power and resolution within standard manufacturing processes.
Markets
and Products
We are focused on becoming a leader in high-precision analog and
mixed-signal ICs for a broad range of consumer and industrial
markets. Our primary product lines include:
Mixed-Signal Audio
Products: High-precision analog and
mixed-signal products for consumer, professional and automotive
entertainment markets.
Industrial Products: High-precision
analog and mixed-signal components for industrial measurement
applications, such as industrial process control, analytical
instruments, consumer utility, digital power meters and seismic
systems.
Page 3 of 65
Embedded Products: High-precision
processors and software for consumer audio, professional audio
and industrial applications.
We offer approximately 650 products to over 2,500 end-customers
worldwide through both direct and indirect sales channels. Our
major customers are among the worlds leading electronics
manufacturers. We target both large existing and emerging growth
consumer electronic markets that derive value from our expertise
in advanced analog and mixed-signal design processing,
systems-level integrated circuit engineering and embedded
software development. We derive our revenue both domestically
and from a variety of locations across the globe, including the
Peoples Republic of China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, South Korea,
Japan, the European Union, and the United Kingdom.
The following table summarizes sales to distributors that
represent more than 10 percent of our consolidated net
sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
March 25,
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Avnet, Inc. (formerly Memec
Holdings Group)
|
|
|
29
|
%
|
|
|
25
|
%
|
|
|
27
|
%
|
MIXED-SIGNAL
AUDIO PRODUCTS
We are a recognized leader in analog and mixed-signal audio
converter technologies that enable todays new consumer,
professional and automotive entertainment products. Our products
include
analog-to-digital
converters (ADCs),
digital-to-analog
converters (DACs), chips that integrate ADCs and
DACs into a single IC, otherwise known as coder-decoders
(CODECs), digital interface ICs, volume controls and
digital amplifiers. Our broad portfolio of approximately 290
active proprietary products includes the following products,
which have been added in the past fiscal year:
|
|
|
|
|
The CS44130
Class-D
power stage IC for stereo and 2.1 channel applications for
consumer electronic products that demand high quality audio
within small product designs, such as digital televisions, home
theater systems, shelf systems, desktop speakers, PC sound cards
and networked audio systems;
|
|
|
|
The CS4352 DAC, which offers a strong combination of audio
performance and feature integration, targets mainstream consumer
audio products, such as flat-panel digital televisions, DVD
recorders, set-top boxes, game consoles and sound cards;
|
|
|
|
The CS42L52 low-power stereo codec, which provides up to one
watt-per-channel
of highly efficient Class D amplification to external
speakers, ideal for portable consumer electronics applications
such as portable media players, game devices, MP3 player
accessories, IC recorders, digital cameras and camcorders; and
|
|
|
|
The CS4350 DAC, a complete stereo audio converter with on-chip
master clock, noteworthy for its superior audio quality and ease
of design. The CS4350 is ideal for set-top boxes, digital
televisions, personal video recorders, DVD players and
recorders, A/V receivers and automotive applications such as
head units, telematics and in-car entertainment systems.
|
Our products are used in a wide array of consumer applications,
including audio/video receivers (AVRs), DVD players
and recorders, complete home theater systems, set-top boxes, MP3
players, gaming devices, sound cards and digital televisions.
Applications for products within professional markets include
digital mixing consoles, multitrack digital recorders and
effects processors. Applications for products within automotive
markets include amplifiers, satellite radio systems, telematics
and multi-speaker car-audio systems.
Our analog and mixed-signal audio converters support a customer
base featuring such leading companies as BBK, Bose, Cisco,
Creative, Harman Kardon, iRiver, Korg, LG Electronics, Marantz,
Panasonic, Philips, Sony and Samsung. Key competitors to Cirrus
Logic in this product line include Wolfson Microelectronics,
AKM, Texas Instruments/Burr Brown, Analog Devices and Maxim.
INDUSTRIAL
PRODUCTS
We provide high-precision analog and mixed-signal ICs for
industrial measurement applications. We have more than 180
active proprietary products which include ADCs, DACs, successive
approximation register (SAR) converters and
amplifier ICs. Our products are used in a wide array of
high-precision, industrial measurement applications including
industrial process control, analytical and medical instruments,
consumer utility, digital power meters and seismic systems. New
additions to our proprietary product portfolio in the past
fiscal year include:
|
|
|
|
|
The CS5530 single-channel ADC, which opens our market-leading
high-resolution Delta-Sigma ADC technology to the lower-cost
weigh scale and temperature controller markets; and
|
Page 4 of 65
|
|
|
|
|
The CS3003 family of low-noise operational amplifiers, which
broadens our portfolio of devices offering the best available
combination of precision and gain, to include low power
consumption devices.
|
Our key competitors in industrial applications include Analog
Devices, Texas Instruments/Burr Brown, Teridian Semiconductor,
Maxim, Austriamicrosystems and Linear Technologies.
EMBEDDED
PRODUCTS
We provide a wide variety of embedded processor technologies for
consumer and industrial markets. Our embedded portfolio is made
up of approximately 170 active proprietary products. These
embedded processors include audio DSPs primarily targeted at
consumer audio applications, ARM7- and ARM9-based embedded
processors focused on industrial applications,
CobraNetTM
ICs and modules for commercial and professional audio markets,
and Ethernet MACs and
T1/E1 line
interface units. We offer advanced ICs combined with innovation
in software solutions, providing our customers features that
differentiate their products against their competitors.
We offer a family of 24- and 32-bit audio DSPs targeted at a
wide range of applications such as audio/video receivers,
automotive entertainment, set-top boxes, digital televisions and
DVD receivers. In addition, we provide our customers standard
audio algorithms, as well as proprietary audio enhancement
algorithms, such as Intelligent Room Calibration software.
In the general-purpose processor market, our ARM family of
processors offers a highly integrated 32-bit
system-on-a-chip
solution with a wide array of price-performance-integration
points for industrial applications. These embedded processors
support popular third-party software such as Linux and WinCE
Nettm.
In networked digital audio applications, our proprietary
CobraNet controller ICs enable delivery of uncompressed digital
audio over Ethernet networks. In doing so, the distributed audio
co-exists with standard Ethernet network data traffic.
New embedded products introduced in the last fiscal year include:
|
|
|
|
|
The CS4953X, a 32-bit, dual-core audio DSP family that provides
a complete digital audio processor for multichannel audio
applications such as AVRs; and
|
|
|
|
The CS485XX, a 32-bit single-core audio DSP family product that
provides a complete audio post-processing solution to deliver
advanced audio features and home-theater-like audio quality for
all types of consumer electronic products.
|
Our embedded product customers include Bose, Harman Kardon,
Hitachi, inkel, Kenwood, Logitech, Marantz, Onkyo, Panasonic,
Pioneer, RCA/Thomson S.A., Sharp and Sony. Our competitors in
embedded product solutions include Analog Devices, ATMEL,
Freescale Semiconductor, IDT, Realtek, Samsung, Sigmatel and
Texas Instruments/Burr Brown.
Manufacturing
We contract with third parties for all of our wafer fabrication,
assembly, and test services. Our fabless manufacturing strategy
allows us to concentrate on our design strengths, minimize fixed
costs and capital expenditures, access advanced manufacturing
facilities and provide flexibility to source multiple
leading-edge technologies through strategic relationships. After
wafer fabrication by the foundry, third-party assembly vendors
package the wafer die. The finished products are then sent for
testing before shipment to our customers. Our supply chain
management organization is responsible for the management of all
aspects of the manufacturing and testing of our products,
including process and package development, test program
development, and production testing of products in accordance
with our ISO-certified quality management system. We use
multiple foundries, assembly and test houses.
Patents,
Licenses and Trademarks
We rely on trade secret, patent, copyright and trademark laws to
protect our intellectual property products and technology. We
intend to continue this practice in the future to protect our
products and technologies. As of March 31, 2007, we held
983 U.S. patents, 140 U.S. patent applications pending
and various corresponding international patents and
applications. Our U.S. patents expire in years 2007 through
2026.
We have obtained U.S. federal registrations for the CIRRUS
LOGIC®,
CIRRUS®
and
CRYSTAL®
trademarks as well as our Cirrus Logic logo trademark. These
U.S. registrations may be renewed as long as the marks
continue to be used in interstate commerce. We have also filed
or obtained foreign registration for these marks in other
countries or jurisdictions where we conduct, or anticipate
conducting, international business.
Page 5 of 65
To complement our own research and development efforts, we have
also licensed and expect to continue to license, a variety of
intellectual property and technologies important to our business
from third parties.
Research
and Development
We concentrate our research and development efforts on the
design and development of new products for each of our principal
markets. We also fund certain advanced-process technology
development, as well as other emerging product opportunities.
Expenditures for research and development in fiscal years 2007,
2006, and 2005, were $44.0 million, $45.8 million,
$80.5 million, respectively. These amounts include
amortization of acquired intangibles of $0.3 million,
$1.4 million $13.7 million, in fiscal years 2007,
2006, and 2005, respectively. Our future success is highly
dependent upon our ability to develop complex new products, to
transfer new products to volume production in a timely fashion,
to introduce them to the marketplace ahead of the competition
and to have them selected for design into products of systems
manufacturers. Our future success may also depend on assisting
our customers with integration of our components into their new
products, including providing support from the concept stage
through design, launch and production ramp.
Competition
Markets for our products are highly competitive and we expect
that competition will continue to increase. We compete with
other semiconductor suppliers that offer standard
semiconductors, application-specific standard product and fully
customized ICs, including embedded software, chip and
board-level products. A few customers also develop ICs that
compete with our products. Our strategy involves providing
lower-cost versions of existing products and new, more advanced
products for customers new designs.
While no single company competes with us in all of our product
lines, we face significant competition in each of our major
product lines, as detailed above in our product line
discussions. We expect to face additional competition from new
entrants in our markets, which may include both large domestic
and international IC manufacturers and smaller, emerging
companies.
The principal competitive factors in our markets include time to
market; quality of hardware/software design and end-market
systems expertise; price; product benefits that are
characterized by performance, features, quality and
compatibility with standards; access to advanced process and
packaging technologies at competitive prices; and sales and
technical support, including assisting our customers with
integration of our components into their new products and
providing support from the concept stage through design, launch
and production ramp.
Competition typically occurs at the design stage, where the
customer evaluates alternative design approaches that require
ICs. Many of our products have not been available from second
sources; thus, once our ICs have been designed into a
customers system, we generally do not face direct
competition in selling our products.
Product life cycles vary greatly by product category. For
example, many consumer electronic devices have shorter design-in
cycles; therefore, our competitors have increasingly frequent
opportunities to achieve design wins in next-generation systems.
Conversely, this also provides us more frequent opportunities to
displace competitors in products we have previously not been
designed in. The industrial and automotive markets typically
have longer life cycles, which provide continued revenue streams
over long periods of time. In the event that competitors succeed
in supplanting our products, our market share may not be
sustainable and net sales, gross margins and earnings could be
adversely affected.
Sales,
Marketing and Technical Support
Export sales, which include sales to customers with
manufacturing plants outside the United States, were
62 percent, 66 percent and 67 percent, in fiscal
years 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. We maintain a worldwide
sales force, which is intended to provide geographically
specific selling support to our customers and specialized
selling of product lines with unique customer bases.
Our domestic sales force includes a network of regional direct
sales offices located in California, Florida, Massachusetts,
Nevada, Oregon and Texas. International sales offices and staff
are located in Hong Kong, Shanghai and Shenzen in the
Peoples Republic of China, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan,
Japan and the United Kingdom. We supplement our direct sales
force with external sales representatives and distributors. Our
technical support staff is located in Texas, Beijing and
Shanghai in the Peoples Republic of China.
Backlog
Sales are made primarily pursuant to standard short-term
purchase orders for delivery of standard products. The quantity
actually ordered by the customer, as well as the shipment
schedules, are frequently revised, without significant
Page 6 of 65
penalty, to reflect changes in the customers needs. We
utilize backlog as an indicator to assist us in production
planning. However, backlog is influenced by several factors
including market demand, pricing and customer order patterns in
reaction to product lead times. Quantities actually purchased by
customers, as well as prices, are subject to variations between
booking and delivery to reflect changes in customer needs or
industry conditions. As a result, we believe that our backlog at
any given time is not a reliable indicator of future revenues.
Employees
As of March 31, 2007, we had 456 full-time employees,
of whom 53 percent were engaged in research and product
development activities, 41 percent in sales, marketing,
general and administrative activities and 6 percent in
manufacturing-related activities. Our future success depends, in
part, on our ability to continue to attract, retain and motivate
highly qualified technical, marketing, engineering and
administrative personnel.
Due to the highly competitive nature of the marketplace that we
operate in, we may from
time-to-time
lose key employees to our competitors. We have been able to hire
qualified personnel in the past to fill open positions created
by these occurrences, although there can be no assurance that we
will be able to do this in the future. None of our employees are
represented by collective bargaining agreements.
|
|
ITEM 1A.
|
Risk
Factors Affecting Our Business and Prospects
|
Our business faces significant risks. The risk factors set forth
below may not be the only risks that we face. Additional risks
that we are not aware of yet or that currently are not
significant may adversely affect our business operations. You
should read the following cautionary statements in conjunction
with the factors discussed elsewhere in this and other Cirrus
Logics filings with the Commission. These cautionary
statements are intended to highlight certain factors that may
affect the financial condition and results of operations of
Cirrus Logic and are not meant to be an exhaustive discussion of
risks that apply to companies such as ours.
Our
results may be affected by the fluctuation in sales in the
consumer entertainment market.
Because we sell products in the consumer entertainment market,
we are likely to be affected by seasonality in the sales of our
products. Further, a decline in consumer confidence and consumer
spending relating to economic conditions, terrorist attacks,
armed conflicts, oil prices, global health conditions
and/or the
political stability of countries in which we operate or sell
into could have a material adverse effect on our business.
The
highly cyclical and volatile nature of our industry may affect
our operating results.
We are subject to business cycles and it is difficult to predict
the timing, length or volatility of these cycles. During
downturns, customers usually reduce purchases, delay delivery of
products, shorten lead times on orders
and/or
cancel orders. During upturns, our third party suppliers and
contract manufacturers may have capacity or supply constraints
that result in higher costs, longer lead times,
and/or an
inability to meet customer demand. These business cycles may
create pressure on our sales, gross margins
and/or
operating results.
We cannot assure that any future downturn or upturn will not
have a material adverse effect on our business and results of
operations. We cannot assure that we will not experience
substantial
period-to-period
fluctuations in revenue due to general semiconductor industry
conditions or other factors.
Our
failure to develop and timely introduce new products that gain
market acceptance could harm our operating
results.
Our success depends upon our ability to develop new products for
new and existing markets, to introduce these products in a
timely and cost-effective manner, and to have these products
gain market acceptance. New product introductions involve
significant risks. For example, delays in new product
introductions or
less-than-anticipated
market acceptance of our new products are possible and would
have an adverse effect on our revenue and earnings. The
development of new products is highly complex and, from
time-to-time,
we have experienced delays in developing and introducing these
new products. Successful product development and introduction
depend on a number of factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
proper new product definition;
|
|
|
|
timely completion of design and testing of new products;
|
|
|
|
assisting our customers with integration of our components into
their new products, including providing support from the concept
stage through design, launch and production ramp;
|
Page 7 of 65
|
|
|
|
|
successfully developing and implementing the software necessary
to integrate our products into our customers products;
|
|
|
|
achievement of acceptable manufacturing yields;
|
|
|
|
availability of wafer, assembly and test capacity;
|
|
|
|
market acceptance of our products and the products of our
customers; and
|
|
|
|
obtaining and retaining industry certification requirements.
|
Although we seek to design products that have the potential to
become industry standard products, we cannot assure that market
leaders will adopt any products introduced by us, or that any
products initially accepted by our customers who are market
leaders will become industry standard products. Both revenues
and margins may be materially affected if new product
introductions are delayed, or if our products are not designed
into successive generations of our customers products. We
cannot assure that we will be able to meet these challenges, or
adjust to changing market conditions as quickly and
cost-effectively as necessary to compete successfully. Our
failure to develop and introduce new products successfully could
harm our business and operating results.
Successful product design and development is dependent on our
ability to attract, retain and motivate qualified design
engineers, of which there is a limited number. Due to the
complexity and variety of analog and high-precision analog and
mixed-signal circuits, the limited number of qualified
integrated circuit designers and the limited effectiveness of
computer-aided design systems in the design of analog and
mixed-signal ICs, we cannot assure that we will be able to
successfully develop and introduce new products on a timely
basis.
Our
products are complex and could contain defects, which could
result in material costs to us.
Product development in the markets we serve is becoming more
focused on the integration of multiple functions on individual
devices. There is a general trend towards increasingly complex
products. The greater integration of functions and complexity of
operations of our products increases the risk that our customers
or end users could discover latent defects or subtle faults
after volumes of product have been shipped. This could result in:
|
|
|
|
|
damage to our reputation;
|
|
|
|
a material recall and replacement costs for product warranty and
support;
|
|
|
|
payments to our customer related to such recall claims as a
result of various industry or business practices, or in order to
maintain good customer relationships;
|
|
|
|
an adverse impact to our customer relationships by the
occurrence of significant defects;
|
|
|
|
a delay in recognition or loss of revenues, loss of market
share, or failure to achieve market acceptance; and
|
|
|
|
a diversion of the attention of our engineering personnel from
our product development efforts.
|
In addition, any defects or other problems with our products
could result in financial or other damages to our customers who
could seek damages from us for their losses. A product liability
claim brought against us, even if unsuccessful, would likely be
time consuming and costly to defend. In particular, the sale of
systems and components into certain applications for the
automotive industry involves a high degree of risk that such
claims may be made.
While we believe that we are reasonably insured against these
risks and contractually limit our financial exposure, we cannot
assure that we will be able to obtain sufficient insurance, in
terms of amounts or scope, to provide us with adequate coverage
against all potential liability.
We
have historically experienced fluctuations in our operating
results and expect these fluctuations to continue in future
periods.
Our quarterly and annual operating results are affected by a
wide variety of factors that could materially and adversely
affect our net sales, gross margins and operating results. These
factors include:
|
|
|
|
|
the volume and timing of orders received;
|
|
|
|
changes in the mix of our products sold;
|
|
|
|
market acceptance of our products and the products of our
customers;
|
|
|
|
competitive pricing pressures;
|
Page 8 of 65
|
|
|
|
|
our ability to introduce new products on a timely basis;
|
|
|
|
the timing and extent of our research and development expenses;
|
|
|
|
the failure to anticipate changing customer product requirements;
|
|
|
|
disruption in the supply of wafers, assembly or test services;
|
|
|
|
certain production and other risks associated with using
independent manufacturers, assembly houses and testers; and
|
|
|
|
product obsolescence, price erosion, competitive developments,
and other competitive factors.
|
We may
face increased risks and uncertainties related to our
non-marketable securities.
On occasion, we may invest in non-marketable securities of
private companies. As of March 31, 2007, the carrying value
of our investments in non-marketable securities totaled
$3.6 million.
Investments in non-marketable securities are inherently risky,
and some of these companies are likely to fail. Their success
(or lack thereof) is dependent on these companies product
development, market acceptance, operational efficiency and other
key business success factors. In addition, depending on these
companies future prospects, they may not be able to raise
additional funds when needed or they may receive lower
valuations, with less favorable investment terms than in
previous financings, and our investments in them would likely
become impaired.
Shifts
in industry-wide capacity and our practice of purchasing our
products based on sales forecasts may result in significant
fluctuations in our quarterly and annual operating
results.
As a fabless semiconductor developer, we rely on independent
foundries and assembly and test houses to manufacture our
products. Our reliance on these third parties involves certain
risks and uncertainties. For example, shifts in industry-wide
capacity from shortages to oversupply, or from oversupply to
shortages, may result in significant fluctuations in our
quarterly and annual operating results. We may order wafers and
build inventory in advance of receiving purchase orders. Because
our industry is highly cyclical and is subject to significant
downturns resulting from excess capacity, overproduction,
reduced demand, order cancellations, or technological
obsolescence, there is a risk that we will forecast inaccurately
and produce excess inventories of particular products.
In addition, we generally order our products through
non-cancelable purchase orders from third-party foundries based
on our sales forecasts, and our customers can generally cancel
or reschedule orders they place with us without significant
penalties. If we do not receive orders as anticipated by our
forecasts, or our customers cancel orders that are placed, we
may experience increased inventory levels.
Due to the product manufacturing cycle characteristic of IC
manufacturing and the inherent imprecision by our customers to
accurately forecast their demand, product inventories may not
always correspond to product demand, leading to shortages or
surpluses of certain products. As a result of such inventory
imbalances, future inventory write-downs and charges to gross
margin may occur due to lower of cost or market accounting,
excess inventory, and inventory obsolescence.
Strong
competition in the semiconductor market may harm our
business.
The IC industry is intensely competitive and is frequently
characterized by rapid technological change, price erosion and
design, technological obsolescence, and a push towards IC
component integration. Because of shortened product life cycles
and even shorter design-in cycles in a number of the markets
that we serve, our competitors have increasingly frequent
opportunities to achieve design wins in next-generation systems.
In the event that competitors succeed in supplanting our
products, our market share may not be sustainable and our net
sales, gross margins and operating results would be adversely
affected. Additionally, further component integration could
eliminate the need for our products.
We compete in a number of fragmented markets. Our principal
competitors in these markets include AKM, Analog Devices, ATMEL,
Austriamicrosystems, Freescale Semiconductor, IDT, Linear
Technologies, Maxim, Realtek, Samsung, Sigmatel, Teridian
Semiconductor, Texas Instruments/Burr Brown and Wolfson
Microelectronics-many of whom have substantially greater
financial, engineering, manufacturing, marketing, technical,
distribution and other resources, broader product lines, greater
intellectual property rights and longer relationships with
customers. We also expect intensified competition from emerging
companies and from customers who develop their own IC products.
In addition, some of our current and future competitors maintain
their own fabrication facilities, which could benefit them in
connection with cost, capacity and technical issues.
Page 9 of 65
Increased competition could adversely affect our business. We
cannot assure that we will be able to compete successfully in
the future or that competitive pressures will not adversely
affect our financial condition and results of operations.
Competitive pressures could reduce market acceptance of our
products and result in price reductions and increases in
expenses that could adversely affect our business and our
financial condition.
We may
be unable to protect our intellectual property
rights.
Our success depends on our ability to obtain patents and
licenses and to preserve our other intellectual property rights
covering our products. We seek patent protection for those
inventions and technologies for which we believe such protection
is suitable and is likely to provide a competitive advantage to
us. We also rely substantially on trade secrets, proprietary
technology, non-disclosure and other contractual agreements, and
technical measures to protect our technology and manufacturing
knowledge. We work actively to foster continuing technological
innovation to maintain and protect our competitive position. We
cannot assure that steps taken by us to protect our intellectual
property will be adequate, that our competitors will not
independently develop or patent substantially equivalent or
superior technologies or be able to design around our patents,
or that our intellectual property will not be misappropriated.
In addition, the laws of some
non-U.S. countries
may not protect our intellectual property as well as the laws of
the United States.
Any of these events could materially adversely affect our
business, operating results and financial condition. Policing
infringement of our technology is difficult, and litigation may
be necessary in the future to enforce our intellectual property
rights. Any such litigation could be expensive, take significant
time and divert managements attention from other business
concerns.
Potential
intellectual property claims and litigation could subject us to
significant liability for damages and could invalidate our
proprietary rights.
The IC industry is characterized by frequent litigation
regarding patent and other intellectual property rights. We may
find it necessary to initiate a lawsuit to assert our patent or
other intellectual property rights. These legal proceedings
could be expensive, take significant time and divert
managements attention from other business concerns. We
cannot assure that we will ultimately be successful in any
lawsuit, nor can we assure that any patent owned by us will not
be invalidated, circumvented, or challenged. We cannot assure
that rights granted under the patent will provide competitive
advantages to us, or that any of our pending or future patent
applications will be issued with the scope of the claims sought
by us, if at all.
As is typical in the IC industry, we and our customers have from
time to time received and may in the future receive,
communications from third parties asserting patents, mask work
rights, or copyrights. In the event third parties were to make a
valid intellectual property claim and a license was not
available on commercially reasonable terms, our operating
results could be harmed. Litigation, which could result in
substantial cost to us and diversion of our management,
technical and financial resources, may also be necessary to
defend us against claimed infringement of the rights of others.
An unfavorable outcome in any such suit could have an adverse
effect on our future operations
and/or
liquidity.
Our
products may be subject to average selling prices that decline
over short time periods. If we are unable to increase our
volumes, introduce new or enhanced products with higher selling
prices or reduce our costs, our business and operating results
could be harmed.
Historically in the semiconductor industry, average selling
prices of products have decreased over time. If the average
selling price of any of our products declines and we are unable
to increase our unit volumes, introduce new or enhanced products
with higher margins
and/or
reduce manufacturing costs to offset anticipated decreases in
the prices of our existing products, our operating results may
be adversely affected. In addition, because of procurement lead
times, we are limited in our ability to reduce total costs
quickly in response to any revenue shortfalls. Because of these
factors, we may experience material adverse fluctuations in our
future operating results on a quarterly or annual basis.
We
have significant international sales, and risks associated with
these sales could harm our operating results.
Export sales, principally to Asia, include sales to U.S-based
customers with manufacturing plants overseas and accounted for
62 percent, 66 percent, and 67 percent of our net
sales in fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. We
expect export sales to continue to represent a significant
portion of product sales. This reliance on international sales
subjects us to the risks of conducting business internationally,
including political and economic stability and global health
conditions, especially in Asia. For example, the financial
instability in a given region may have an adverse impact on the
Page 10 of 65
financial position of end users in the region, which could
affect future orders and harm our results of operations. Our
international sales operations involve a number of other risks,
including:
|
|
|
|
|
unexpected changes in government regulatory requirements;
|
|
|
|
changes to countries banking and credit requirements;
|
|
|
|
changes in diplomatic and trade relationships;
|
|
|
|
delays resulting from difficulty in obtaining export licenses
for technology;
|
|
|
|
tariffs and other barriers and restrictions;
|
|
|
|
competition with
non-U.S. companies
or other domestic companies entering the
non-U.S. markets
in which we operate;
|
|
|
|
longer sales and payment cycles;
|
|
|
|
problems in collecting accounts receivable;
|
|
|
|
political instability; and
|
|
|
|
the burdens of complying with a variety of
non-U.S. laws.
|
In addition, our competitive position may be affected by the
exchange rate of the U.S. dollar against other currencies.
Consequently, increases in the value of the dollar would
increase the price in local currencies of our products in
non-U.S. markets
and make our products relatively more expensive. Alternatively,
decreases in the value of the dollar will increase the relative
cost of our and our vendors operations that are based
overseas. We cannot assure that regulatory, political and other
factors will not adversely affect our operations in the future
or require us to modify our current business practices.
Failure
to manage our distribution channel relationships could adversely
affect our business.
The future of our business, as well as the future growth of our
business, will depend in part on our ability to manage our
relationships with current and future distributors and external
sales representatives and to develop additional channels for the
distribution and sale of our products. The inability to
successfully manage these relationships could adversely affect
our business.
Our
international operations subject our business to additional
political and economic risks that could have an adverse impact
on our business.
In addition to export sales constituting a majority of our net
sales, we maintain significant international operations,
including design, sales and technical support personnel. We are
also using contract manufacturers in Asia for foundry, assembly
and test operations. International expansion has required and
will continue to require significant management attention and
resources. There are risks inherent in expanding our presence
into
non-U.S. regions,
including, but not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
difficulties in staffing and managing
non-U.S. operations;
|
|
|
|
failure of
non-U.S. laws
to adequately protect our U.S. intellectual property,
patent, trademarks, copyrights
know-how and
other proprietary rights;
|
|
|
|
global health conditions and potential natural disasters;
|
|
|
|
political and economic instability in international regions;
|
|
|
|
international currency controls and exchange rate fluctuations;
|
|
|
|
additional vulnerability from terrorist groups targeting
American interests abroad; and
|
|
|
|
legal uncertainty regarding liability and compliance with
non-U.S. laws
and regulatory requirements.
|
If we
fail to attract, hire and retain qualified personnel, we may not
be able to develop, market, or sell our products or successfully
manage our business.
Competition for personnel in our industry is intense. The number
of technology companies in the geographic areas in which we
operate is greater than it has been historically and we expect
competition for qualified personnel to intensify. There are only
a limited number of people in the job market with the requisite
skills. Our Human Resources organization
Page 11 of 65
focuses significant efforts on attracting and retaining
individuals in key technology positions. For example,
start-up
companies generally offer larger equity grants to attract
individuals from more established companies. The loss of the
services of key personnel or our inability to hire new personnel
with the requisite skills could restrict our ability to develop
new products or enhance existing products in a timely manner,
sell products to our customers, or manage our business
effectively.
Because
we depend on subcontractors primarily located in Asia to perform
key manufacturing functions for us, we are subject to political
and economic risks that could disrupt the assembly, packaging,
or testing of our products.
We depend on third-party subcontractors, primarily in Asia, for
the assembly, packaging and testing of our products.
International operations and sales may be subject to political
and economic risks, including changes in current tax laws,
political instability, global health conditions, currency
controls, exchange rate fluctuations and changes in
import/export regulations, tariff and freight rates, as well as
the risks of natural disaster. Although we seek to reduce our
dependence on subcontractors, this concentration of
subcontractors and manufacturing operations in Asia subjects us
to the risks of conducting business internationally, including
political and economic conditions in Asia. Disruption or
termination of the assembly, packaging or testing of our
products could occur and such disruptions could harm our
business and operating results.
We may
acquire other companies or technologies, which may create
additional risks associated with our ability to successfully
integrate them into our business.
We continue to consider future acquisitions of other companies,
or their technologies or products, to improve our market
position, broaden our technological capabilities and expand our
product offerings. However, we may not be able to acquire, or
successfully identify, the companies, products or technologies
that would enhance our business.
In addition, if we are able to acquire companies, products or
technologies, we could experience difficulties in integrating
them. Integrating acquired businesses involves a number of
risks, including, but not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
the potential disruption of our ongoing business;
|
|
|
|
unexpected costs or incurring unknown liabilities;
|
|
|
|
the diversion of management resources from other business
concerns while involved in identifying, completing, and
integrating acquisitions;
|
|
|
|
the inability to retain the employees of the acquired businesses;
|
|
|
|
difficulties relating to integrating the operations and
personnel of the acquired businesses;
|
|
|
|
adverse effects on the existing customer relationships of
acquired companies;
|
|
|
|
the potential incompatibility of business cultures;
|
|
|
|
adverse effects associated with entering into markets and
acquiring technologies in areas in which we have little
experience; and
|
|
|
|
acquired intangible assets becoming impaired as a result of
technological advancements, or
worse-than-expected
performance of the acquired company.
|
If we are unable to successfully address any of these risks, our
business could be harmed.
We may
face difficulties integrating and may incur costs associated
with our acquisition of Caretta Integrated
Circuits, Inc. and any future acquisitions.
In fiscal year 2007, we acquired 100 percent of the voting
interests in Caretta Integrated Circuits, Inc.
(Caretta). We could experience difficulties
integrating the personnel, products, technologies, and
operations of this company. Integrating acquired businesses
involves a number of other risks, including, but not limited to:
|
|
|
|
|
the potential disruption of our ongoing business;
|
|
|
|
unexpected costs or incurring unknown liabilities;
|
|
|
|
the diversion of managements resources from other business
concerns involved in identifying, completing, and integrating
acquisitions;
|
|
|
|
the inability to retain the employees of the acquired businesses;
|
Page 12 of 65
|
|
|
|
|
difficulties relating to integrating the operations and
personnel of the acquired businesses;
|
|
|
|
adverse effects on the existing customer relationships of
acquired companies;
|
|
|
|
the potential incompatibility of business cultures;
|
|
|
|
entering into markets and acquiring technologies in areas in
which we have little experience; and
|
|
|
|
acquired intangible assets becoming impaired as a result of
technological advancements, or
worse-than-expected
performance of the acquired company.
|
If we are unable to successfully address any of these risks, our
business could be harmed.
Future
transactions may limit our ability to use our net operating loss
carryforwards.
As of March 31, 2007, we had U.S. federal tax net
operating loss (NOL) carryforwards of approximately
$468.4 million. These NOL carryforwards may be used to
offset future taxable income and thereby reduce our
U.S. federal income taxes otherwise payable. There is a
risk we may not be able to generate taxable income in the future
in the amount necessary to fully utilize all of these NOLs.
Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the
Code), as amended, imposes an annual limit on the ability
of a corporation that undergoes an ownership change
to use its NOL carry forwards to reduce its tax liability. Due
in part to potential changes in our shareholder base, we may at
some point in the future experience an ownership
change as defined in Section 382 of the Code.
Accordingly, our use of the net operating loss carryforwards and
credit carryforwards may be limited by the annual limitations
described in Sections 382 and 383 of the Code.
Despite
our efforts to make appropriate judgments in determining the
correct measurement dates for our stock option grants, the
Securities and Exchange Commission may disagree with our
reporting or we may discover additional information in the
future concerning the appropriate measurement dates. Therefore,
a risk exists that we may have to further restate our prior
financial statements.
We have recorded additional non-cash share-based compensation
expense, and related tax effects, with regard to certain past
stock option grants, and we have restated certain previously
filed financial statements as discussed in Item 7 of this
10-K. While
we believe that we have made appropriate judgments in
determining the correct measurement dates for our stock option
grants, the Commission may disagree with the manner in which we
have accounted for and reported the financial impact or we may
discover additional information concerning appropriate
measurement dates. Accordingly, we may be required to further
restate our prior financial statements, amend prior filings with
the Commission or take other actions not currently contemplated.
Our
operating results for fiscal year 2006 and prior periods have
been materially impacted by the results of the voluntary review
of our past stock option granting practices. Any related action
by a governmental agency could result in civil or criminal
sanctions. Such matters and civil litigation relating to our
historical option practices or our restatement of our financial
statements could result in significant costs and the diversion
of attention of our management and other key employees, which
could have an adverse effect on us.
On October 26, 2006, we received an informal request for
information from the staff of the Fort Worth, Texas
regional office of the Commission regarding our historical
option granting practices. In addition, we have been contacted
by the United States Attorneys Office for the Southern
District of New York regarding the results of our investigation.
We are cooperating with the Commissions informal
investigation, but do not know when or how it will be resolved
or what, if any, actions the Commission may require us to take
as part of the resolution of that matter. If the Commission
disagrees with the manner in which we have accounted for and
reported the financial impact of past stock option grants, there
could be further delays in filing subsequent Commission reports
that could result in delisting of the Companys common
stock from the NASDAQ Global Select Market.
Moreover, as discussed in Item 7 of this
10-K, we are
currently engaged in civil litigation with parties that claim,
among other allegations, that certain of our current and former
directors and officers improperly dated stock option grants to
enhance their own profits on the exercise of such options or for
other improper purposes. Although we and the other defendants
intend to defend these claims vigorously, there are many
uncertainties associated with any litigation, and we cannot
assure you that these actions will be resolved without
substantial costs
and/or
settlement charges. We have entered into indemnification
agreements with most of our present and former directors and
officers. Under those agreements, we may be required to
indemnify each such director or officer against losses incurred
by such individual in connection with the pending litigation
(other than indemnified liabilities arising from willful
misconduct, conduct that is knowingly fraudulent or deliberately
dishonest, or claims in the form of derivative damages owed to
the corporation). We are
Page 13 of 65
required, under the indemnification agreements, to advance
expenses for the defense of the claims, including
attorneys fees on a current basis, subject to a claim for
reimbursement should the indemnitee be adjudicated ineligible
for indemnification.
The resolution of the pending informal investigation by the
Commission, the defense of our pending civil litigations, our
indemnification obligations to current and former directors and
officers, and the defense of any additional litigation relating
to our past option grant practices or our restatement of our
prior financial statements could result in significant costs and
diversion of the attention of management.
Our
stock price may be volatile.
The market price of our common stock fluctuates significantly.
This fluctuation is the result of numerous factors, including:
|
|
|
|
|
actual or anticipated fluctuations in our operating results;
|
|
|
|
announcements concerning our business or those of our
competitors, customers or suppliers;
|
|
|
|
changes in financial estimates by securities analysts or our
failure to perform as anticipated by the analysts;
|
|
|
|
announcements regarding technological innovations or new
products by us or our competitors;
|
|
|
|
announcements by us of significant acquisitions, strategic
partnerships, joint ventures, or capital commitment;
|
|
|
|
announcements by us of significant divestitures or sale of
certain assets or intellectual property;
|
|
|
|
litigation arising out of a wide variety of matters, including,
among others, employment matters and intellectual property
matters;
|
|
|
|
departure of key personnel;
|
|
|
|
single significant shareholders selling for reasons unrelated to
the business;
|
|
|
|
general assumptions made by securities analysts;
|
|
|
|
general conditions in the IC industry; and
|
|
|
|
general market conditions and interest rates.
|
We
have provisions in our charter, and are subject to certain
provisions of Delaware law, which could prevent, delay or impede
a change of control of our company. These provisions could
affect the market price of our stock.
Certain provisions of our Certificate of Incorporation and
By-Laws, and Delaware law could make it more difficult for a
third party to acquire us, even if our stockholders support the
acquisition. These provisions include:
|
|
|
|
|
the inability of stockholders to call a special meeting of
stockholders;
|
|
|
|
a prohibition on stockholder action by written consent; and
|
|
|
|
a requirement that stockholders provide advance notice of any
stockholder nominations of directors or any proposal of new
business to be considered at any meeting of stockholders.
|
We are also subject to the anti-takeover laws of Delaware that
may prevent, delay or impede a third party from acquiring or
merging with us, which may adversely affect the market price of
our common stock.
|
|
ITEM 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
None.
The Company does not own any real estate. As of May 1,
2007, our principal leased facilities, located in Austin, Texas,
consisted of approximately 214,000 square feet of office
space, which have lease terms that extend through calendar year
2012, excluding renewal options. This leased space includes our
headquarters and engineering facility, which has
197,000 square feet and 17,000 square feet of leased
space at our failure analysis facility. We have subleased
approximately 70,000 square feet of space at our Austin
headquarters and engineering facilities. The longest of these
subleases extends through calendar year 2012.
Page 14 of 65
We also lease facilities in Fremont, California. These
facilities consist of approximately 291,000 square feet of
leased office and engineering space, which have leases that
expire from fiscal year 2008 to fiscal year 2010, excluding
renewal options. During fiscal year 2007, leases expired on two
properties in Fremont, California that were approximately
139,000 square feet in size. These leases were not renewed.
As a result of our facilities consolidation activities, which
began in fiscal year 1999 concurrent with our move of
headquarters from California to Texas, we no longer occupy any
leased space in California. We have subleased approximately
125,000 square feet of our leased office space in
California. We continue to actively pursue sublease tenants for
these remaining facilities.
During fiscal year 2007, we transitioned our design activities
at our Boulder, Colorado design facility to our headquarters in
Austin, Texas. This design facility is approximately
12,000 square feet in size and has a lease which expires in
fiscal year 2011; however, we plan to exercise an early
termination option provided to us in the lease, in which case we
will be released from our obligations under the lease in fiscal
year 2009. The costs associated with exercising that early
termination feature are immaterial.
Below is a detailed schedule that identifies our occupied leased
property locations as of May 1, 2007 with various lease
terms through fiscal year 2013:
|
|
|
|
|
Design Centers
|
|
Sales Support
Offices USA
|
|
Sales Support
Offices International
|
|
Beijing, China
|
|
Burlington, Massachusetts
|
|
Hong Kong, China
|
Shanghai, China
|
|
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Shanghai, China
|
Austin, Texas
|
|
|
|
Shenzhen, China
Tokyo, Japan
Singapore
Seoul, South Korea
Taipei, Taiwan
Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom
|
See Notes 7 and 10 in the Notes to our Consolidated
Financial Statements contained in
Item 8 Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data for further detail.
|
|
ITEM 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
Derivative
Lawsuits
On January 5, 2007, a purported stockholder filed a
derivative lawsuit in state district court in Travis County,
Texas against current and former officers and directors of
Cirrus Logic and against the Company, as a nominal defendant,
alleging various breaches of fiduciary duties, conspiracy,
improper financial reporting, insider trading, violations of the
Texas Securities Act, unjust enrichment, accounting, gross
mismanagement, abuse of control, rescission, and waste of
corporate assets related to certain prior grants of stock
options by the Company. Our response to the lawsuit was filed on
April 20, 2007.
On March 19, 2007, another purported stockholder filed a
derivative lawsuit related to the Companys prior stock
option grants in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas Austin Division against
current and former officers and directors of Cirrus Logic and
against the Company, as a nominal defendant. The individual
defendants named in this lawsuit overlap, but not completely,
with the state suit. The lawsuit alleges many of the causes of
action alleged in the Texas state court suit, but also includes
claims for alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the
Exchange Act and
Rule 10b-5,
violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and
violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. On
April 10, 2007, we filed a motion to dismiss the complaint
on the grounds that the plaintiff was supposed to make demands
on the Board before filing the lawsuit. The plaintiff has not
filed a response and no hearing before the court is currently
set on the motion to dismiss.
On March 30, 2007, a different purported stockholder filed
a nearly identical derivative lawsuit to the March 19, 2007
derivative lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas Austin Division with
identical allegations against the same defendants.
On May 22, 2007, a fourth derivative lawsuit related to the
Companys prior stock option grants was filed. This lawsuit
was also filed in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas-Austin Division and contained similar
allegations to the other previously filed derivative lawsuits.
Silvaco
Data Systems
On December 8, 2004, Silvaco Data Systems
(Silvaco) filed suit against us, and others,
alleging misappropriation of trade secrets, conversion, unfair
business practices, and civil conspiracy. Silvacos
complaint stems from a trade secret
Page 15 of 65
dispute between Silvaco and a software vendor, Circuit
Semantics, Inc., who supplies us with certain software design
tools. Silvaco alleges that our use of Circuit Semantics
design tools infringes upon Silvacos trade secrets and
that we are liable for compensatory damages in the sum of
$10 million. Silvaco has not indicated how it will
substantiate this amount of damages and we are unable to
reasonably estimate the amount of damages, if any.
On January 25, 2005, we answered Silvacos complaint
by denying any wrong-doing. In addition, we filed a
cross-complaint against Silvaco alleging breach of contract
relating to Silvacos refusal to provide certain technology
that would enable us to use certain unrelated software tools.
We intend to defend the lawsuit vigorously. In addition, Circuit
Semantics is obligated to defend and indemnify us pursuant to
our license agreement with them for the software. However, we
cannot predict the ultimate outcome of this litigation and we
are unable to estimate any potential liability we may incur.
Other
Claims
From time to time, other various claims, charges and litigation
are asserted or commenced against us arising from, or related
to, contractual matters, intellectual property, employment
disputes, as well as other issues. Frequent claims and
litigation involving these types of issues are not uncommon in
the IC industry. As to any of these claims or litigation, we
cannot predict the ultimate outcome with certainty.
ITEM 4. Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
None.
PART II
|
|
ITEM 5.
|
Market
for Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Our Common Stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market
under the symbol CRUS. The following table shows, for the
periods indicated, the high and low sales prices for our Common
Stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Fiscal year ended March 31,
2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter
|
|
$
|
10.46
|
|
|
$
|
7.22
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
|
8.15
|
|
|
|
5.85
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
|
7.71
|
|
|
|
6.56
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
|
9.44
|
|
|
|
6.83
|
|
Fiscal year ended March 25,
2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First quarter
|
|
$
|
5.72
|
|
|
$
|
3.70
|
|
Second quarter
|
|
|
8.04
|
|
|
|
4.90
|
|
Third quarter
|
|
|
7.76
|
|
|
|
6.26
|
|
Fourth quarter
|
|
|
8.76
|
|
|
|
6.65
|
|
As of May 29, 2007, there were approximately 997 holders of
record of our Common Stock.
We have not paid cash dividends on our Common Stock and
currently intend to continue a policy of retaining any earnings
for reinvestment in our business. We did not repurchase any of
our Common Stock during fiscal year 2007 or fiscal year 2006.
Page 16 of 65
Stock
Price Performance Graph
The following graph and table show a comparison of the five-year
cumulative total stockholder return, calculated on a dividend
reinvestment basis, for Cirrus Logic, the S&P 500 Composite
Index (the S&P 500), and the Semiconductor
Subgroup of the S&P Electronics Index (the S&P
Semiconductors Index).
COMPARISON
OF 5 YEAR CUMULATIVE TOTAL RETURN*
Among
Cirrus Logic, Inc., The S&P 500 Index
And The S&P Semiconductors Index
* $100 invested on 3/31/02 in stock or index-including
reinvestment of dividends.
Copyright©
2007, Standard & Poors, a division of The McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
www.researchdatagroup.com/S&P.htm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative Total Return
|
|
|
|
March 2002
|
|
|
March 2003
|
|
|
March 2004
|
|
|
March 2005
|
|
|
March 2006
|
|
|
March 2007
|
|
|
Cirrus Logic, Inc.
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
10.65
|
|
|
|
40.17
|
|
|
|
23.95
|
|
|
|
44.94
|
|
|
|
40.59
|
|
S&P 500
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
75.24
|
|
|
|
101.66
|
|
|
|
108.47
|
|
|
|
121.19
|
|
|
|
135.52
|
|
S&P 500 Semiconductors
|
|
|
100.00
|
|
|
|
51.56
|
|
|
|
88.45
|
|
|
|
74.97
|
|
|
|
81.20
|
|
|
|
74.97
|
|
Stockholder returns over the indicated periods should not be
considered indicative of future stockholder returns.
Page 17 of 65
Equity
Compensation Plan Information
The following table provides information about the
Companys common stock that may be issued upon the exercise
of options, warrants and rights under all of the Companys
existing equity compensation plans as of March 31, 2007,
including the Companys 1987 Stock Option Plan, the 1989
Employee Stock Purchase Plan, the 1990 Directors
Stock Option Plan, the 1996 Stock Plan, the 2002 Stock Option
Plan, the 2006 Stock Incentive Plan, the Audio Logic 1992 Plan,
the Peak Audio, Inc. 2001 Stock Plan, the LuxSonor
Semiconductors, Inc. 1995 Stock Option Plan, the ShareWave, Inc.
1996 Flexible Stock Incentive Plan, the Stream Machine Company
1996 Stock Plan, the Stream Machine 2001 Stock Plan, and the
Stream Machine Company non-statutory stock option grants made
outside of a plan (in thousands, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(A)
|
|
|
(B)
|
|
|
(C)
|
|
|
|
Securities to be issued
|
|
|
Weighted-average
|
|
|
Securities remaining available for
|
|
|
|
upon exercise of
|
|
|
exercise price of
|
|
|
future issuance under equity
|
|
|
|
outstanding options,
|
|
|
outstanding options,
|
|
|
compensation plans (except
|
|
|
|
warrants, and rights
|
|
|
warrants, and rights
|
|
|
securities in column (A))
|
|
|
Equity compensation plans approved
by security holders(1)
|
|
|
5,193
|
|
|
$
|
10.52
|
|
|
|
17,583
|
(2)
|
Equity compensation plans not
approved by security holders(3)
|
|
|
3,827
|
|
|
$
|
5.84
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
9,020
|
|
|
$
|
8.54
|
|
|
|
17,583
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.
|
The Companys stockholders have approved the Companys
1987 Stock Option Plan, the 1989 Employee Stock Purchase Plan,
the 1990 Directors Stock Option Plan, and the 2006
Stock Incentive Plan. The following plans were assumed by the
Company at the time of acquisition, and Cirrus Logic stockholder
approval was not required for these plans or their respective
outstanding grants, as they were approved by the acquired
companies shareholders: the Audio Logic 1992 Plan, the Peak
Audio, Inc. 2001 Stock Plan, the LuxSonor Semiconductors, Inc.
1995 Stock Option Plan, the ShareWave, Inc. 1996 Flexible Stock
Incentive Plan, the Stream Machine Company 1996 Stock Plan, the
Stream Machine 2001 Stock Plan, and the Stream Machine Company
non-statutory stock option grants made outside of a plan.
|
|
|
2.
|
In addition to shares available for issuance under our 2006
Stock Incentive Plan, the number reported includes
877,701 shares available for issuance under the
Companys 1989 Employee Stock Purchase Plan. Our Board of
Directors discontinued all future grants under the option plans
we assumed in connection with our past acquisitions, including
the Audio Logic 1992 Plan, the Peak Audio, Inc. 2001 Stock Plan,
the LuxSonor Semiconductors, Inc. 1995 Stock Option Plan, the
ShareWave, Inc. 1996 Flexible Stock Incentive Plan, the Stream
Machine Company 1996 Stock Plan, and the Stream Machine 2001
Stock Plan, so shares under these plans have not been included
in the total.
|
|
|
3.
|
In August 2002, the Board of Directors approved the 2002 Stock
Option Plan, which permits awards of fair market value stock
options to non-executive employees. As of July 2006, when our
shareholders approved the adoption of the 2006 Stock Incentive
Plan, we cancelled all remaining options available for grant
under the 2002 Stock Option plan.
|
As of March 31, 2007, the Company was awarding options
under the 2006 Stock Incentive Plan and the 1989 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan.
Page 18 of 65
ITEM 6. Selected
Consolidated Financial Data
(Amounts
in thousands, except per share amounts)
The information contained below should be read along with
Item 7 Managements Discussion
and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations and Item 8
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
182,304
|
|
|
$
|
193,694
|
|
|
$
|
194,900
|
|
|
$
|
196,338
|
|
|
$
|
261,999
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing
operations
|
|
|
5,977
|
|
|
|
37,596
|
|
|
|
(38,616
|
)
|
|
|
21,885
|
|
|
|
(210,874
|
)
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share
from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
|
$
|
0.61
|
|
|
$
|
(0.16
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.51
|
|
|
$
|
(2.47
|
)
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share
from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
0.31
|
|
|
$
|
0.60
|
|
|
$
|
(0.16
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.50
|
|
|
$
|
(2.47
|
)
|
Financial position at year end:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash, cash equivalents, restricted
investments and marketable securities
|
|
$
|
271,715
|
|
|
$
|
243,468
|
|
|
$
|
179,713
|
|
|
$
|
200,141
|
|
|
$
|
123,351
|
|
Total assets
|
|
|
353,060
|
|
|
|
319,041
|
|
|
|
262,810
|
|
|
|
314,672
|
|
|
|
257,266
|
|
Working capital
|
|
|
286,417
|
|
|
|
232,189
|
|
|
|
183,283
|
|
|
|
168,898
|
|
|
|
94,451
|
|
Capital lease obligations,
excluding current portion
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ITEM 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
This Annual Report on
Form 10-K
and certain information incorporated herein by reference contain
forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of
the Securities the Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All
statements included or incorporated by reference in this Annual
Report on
Form 10-K,
other than statements that are purely historical, are
forward-looking statements. In some cases, forward-looking
statements are identified by words such as we
expect, anticipate, target,
project, believe, goals,
estimates, and intend. Variations of
these types of words and similar expressions are intended to
identify these forward-looking statements. These forward looking
statements include statements about our outlook for fiscal year
2008, including our anticipated gross margins; research and
development expenses; selling, general and administrative
expenses, and operating profitability. In addition, any
statements that refer to our plans, expectations, strategies or
other characterizations of future events or circumstances are
forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned that these
forward-looking statements are predictions and are subject to
risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to
predict. Therefore, actual results may differ materially and
adversely from those expressed in any forward-looking
statements. Among the important factors that could cause actual
results to differ materially from those indicated by our
forward-looking statements are those discussed in
Item 1A Risk Factors Affecting our
Business and Prospects and elsewhere in this report,
as well as in the documents filed by us with the Commission,
specifically the most recent reports on
Form 10-Q
and 8-K,
each as it may be amended from time to time. We undertake no
obligation to revise or update publicly any forward-looking
statement for any reason.
Voluntary
Review of Stock Option Practices
During fiscal year 2007, we completed a voluntary internal
review and independent investigation into past stock option
granting practices. The voluntary review was undertaken when an
internal review of past practices related to grants of stock
options revealed information that raised potential questions
about the dates used to account for certain stock option grants.
In October 2006, we announced that, at the recommendation of the
Audit Committee of the Companys Board of Directors (the
Board), the Board appointed an independent director
to serve as a Special Committee to conduct an investigation into
our historic stock option granting practices. Based on the
report of the Special Committee and on managements
preliminary conclusions and recommendations, the Board concluded
that incorrect measurement dates were used for financial
accounting purposes for certain stock options granted between
January 1, 1997 and December 31, 2005 and that the
financial statements, related notes and selected financial data
and all financial press releases and similar communications
issued by us and the related reports of the Companys
independent registered public accounting firm relating to fiscal
years 2001 through 2006, and the first fiscal quarter of 2007,
should no longer be relied upon.
To correct the inaccuracies, on April 18, 2007, we filed an
amendment to our annual report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended March 25, 2006 to restate our:
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated balance sheets for the fiscal years ended
March 25, 2006 and March 26, 2005;
|
|
|
|
Consolidated statements of operations, stockholders equity
and cash flows for the fiscal years ended March 25, 2006,
March 26, 2005 and March 27, 2004;
|
Page 19 of 65
|
|
|
|
|
Unaudited quarterly financial data for each of the quarters in
the fiscal years ended March 25, 2006 and March 26,
2005;
|
|
|
|
Selected financial data as of and for the fiscal years ended
March 25, 2006, March 26, 2005, March 27, 2004,
March 29, 2003 and March 30, 2002; and
|
|
|
|
Related disclosures.
|
As of result of revising the measurement dates, the Company
recognized $32.4 million in additional share-based
compensation expense arising from stock grants to executive
officers and employees. Of this amount, approximately
$9.3 million related to options granted to executive
officers who, at the time of the grant, were subject to the
reporting requirements under Section 16 of the Exchange Act
of 1934. None of the additional share-based compensation expense
arose from grants made to non-employee directors.
In addition, on April 18, 2007, we filed an amendment to
our quarterly report on
Form 10-Q
for the quarter ended June 24, 2006 to restate our:
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated balance sheet for the three months ended
June 24, 2006;
|
|
|
|
Consolidated statements of operations and cash flows for the
three months ended June 24, 2006 and June 25,
2005; and
|
|
|
|
Related disclosures.
|
The adjustments did not affect our previously reported revenue,
cash, cash equivalents, or marketable securities balances in any
of the restated periods. For further detail, please see our
Form 10-K/A
and
Form 10-Q/A
filed with the Commission on April 18, 2007.
Overview
We were incorporated in California in 1984, became a public
company in 1989 and were reincorporated in the State of Delaware
in February 1999. Through most of our corporate existence, we
provided ICs for personal computer applications, including
personal computer (PC) graphics and storage. In
2001, we refocused our business efforts away from these areas,
which we believed had become commodity-like in terms of pricing
and offered diminished opportunities for sustained product
differentiation and profitability. We reinforced our commitment
to maintain profitability by taking strategic actions during
fiscal year 2005 and the first part of fiscal year 2006 to
improve our top and bottom line growth, including:
(1) improving efficiencies by completing implementation of
a product line structure focusing on our product lines including
analog mixed-signal products, embedded products, and industrial
products, (2) divesting ourselves of our digital video
product line assets to focus on our core strengths, and
(3) enhancing operations by moving to a completely fabless
business model.
During fiscal year 2007, we drove gross margins to
60 percent for the year. This represented an increase of
6 percent over the fiscal year 2006 gross margin of
54 percent. On December 29, 2006, we completed our
acquisition of 100 percent of the voting equity interests
in Caretta, a company based in Shanghai, China that specializes
in designing power management integrated circuits for the large,
single-cell lithium ion battery market. This acquisition was
undertaken to strengthen and diversify our analog and mixed
signal product portfolios as well as position us for growth
within the Chinese market. In addition, we realized a tax
benefit of approximately $8.4 million that was
predominantly related to the release of a portion of our
valuation allowance with respect to certain deferred tax assets
that we expect to utilize within the next fiscal year.
During fiscal year 2006, we completed the outstanding litigation
with Fujitsu for a net $24.8 million and enhanced our
financial position by obtaining $7.0 million from a
one-time cash receipt associated with an amendment to an
existing licensing agreement, in which certain rights to Cirrus
Logic were terminated from a prior cross-license agreement.
Further, we were able to realize a tax benefit of approximately
$7.0 million due to the expiration of certain statutes
related to
non-U.S. tax
liabilities. We may incur taxes in many of the
non-U.S. and
U.S. state tax jurisdictions in which we operate.
Over the course of fiscal year 2005, we enhanced our focus on
operations and decreased our expenses in research and
development and sales, general, and administrative by a total of
$22.7 million when compared to the previous year. We
recorded an income tax benefit of $20.8 million for fiscal
year 2005 on a pre-tax loss of $34.3 million. This benefit
was the result of reversals of prior year U.S. Federal and
non-U.S. tax
liabilities.
Although we continue to defend our patents and investigate the
potential for leveraging our intellectual property portfolio, we
do not anticipate the same level of benefits we have received in
the past to reoccur in the future. We have
Page 20 of 65
directed our efforts to become a leader in digital audio and
high-performance analog and mixed-signal ICs for consumer
entertainment, professional applications, automotive
entertainment and high-precision industrial measurement
applications. We offer approximately 650 products to over 2,500
end customers worldwide through both direct and indirect sales
channels. We target both large, existing and emerging growth
markets that derive value from our expertise in advanced analog
and mixed-signal design processing, systems-level integrated
circuit engineering and embedded software. End products
incorporating our ICs are marketed by many of the worlds
leading electronics companies, including Bose, Creative
Technologies, Harman/Kardon, LG Electronics, Motorola,
Panasonic, Philips, Pioneer, Samsung, Siemens, Sony and Yamaha,
among others.
Our products include analog and mixed-signal components and
processors for consumer audio, professional audio and automotive
audio applications. Some common items our audio mixed-signal
products may be found in include amplifiers, audio video
receivers (AVRs), DVD players and recorders, DVD
receivers, set-top boxes, digital televisions, portable media
players, game consoles, car audio systems and satellite radios.
The balance of our analog and mixed-signal IC components are
primarily sold into industrial measurement applications, such as
temperature gauges for industrial use, seismic devices for oil
field and seismology applications and high-precision weigh
scales for commercial and scientific use.
We maintain sales, design and technical support personnel in the
U.S. and other locations near our customers. We have
strategically aligned our personnel to provide better support to
our base of system solution customers, most of which maintain
design
and/or
manufacturing sites outside of the United States. We intend to
continue to evaluate our employee headcount in these locations
in order to maintain our high level of commitment and support to
our customers.
We also contract with third parties for all of our wafer
fabrication, assembly and testing operations. Our supply chain
management organization is responsible for the management of all
aspects of the manufacturing and testing of our products,
including process and package development, test program
development, and production testing of products in accordance
with our ISO-certified quality management system. Our fabless
manufacturing strategy allows us to concentrate on our design
strengths, minimize fixed costs and capital expenditures, access
advanced manufacturing facilities, and provide flexibility on
sourcing through multiple qualified vendors.
Results
of Operations
The following table summarizes the results of our operations for
each of the past three fiscal years as a percentage of net
sales. All percentage amounts were calculated using the
underlying data in thousands:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
|
|
100
|
%
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
60
|
%
|
|
|
54
|
%
|
|
|
48
|
%
|
Research and development
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
|
41
|
%
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
29
|
%
|
|
|
26
|
%
|
|
|
22
|
%
|
Restructuring costs and other, net
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
5
|
%
|
Impairment of non-marketable
securities
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
Acquired in-process research and
development
|
|
|
1
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
Litigation settlement
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
(13
|
%)
|
|
|
|
%
|
License agreement amendment
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
(4
|
%)
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
3
|
%
|
|
|
20
|
%
|
|
|
(20
|
%)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
7
|
%
|
|
|
4
|
%
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
10
|
%
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
|
(18
|
%)
|
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
(5
|
%)
|
|
|
(4
|
%)
|
|
|
(11
|
%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
15
|
%
|
|
|
28
|
%
|
|
|
(7
|
%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 21 of 65
Net
Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Mixed-signal audio products
|
|
$
|
85,278
|
|
|
$
|
95,384
|
|
|
$
|
96,083
|
|
Embedded products
|
|
|
46,791
|
|
|
|
52,258
|
|
|
|
46,645
|
|
Industrial products
|
|
|
50,235
|
|
|
|
34,771
|
|
|
|
34,109
|
|
Video products
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,281
|
|
|
|
18,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
182,304
|
|
|
$
|
193,694
|
|
|
$
|
194,900
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales for fiscal year 2007 decreased $11.4 million, or
6 percent, to $182.3 million from $193.7 million
in fiscal year 2006. The drop in net sales is primarily related
to the absence of revenues from our digital video product line,
a product line we divested in fiscal year 2006. This decrease
was accentuated by a $10.1 million decrease in revenues
from our mixed-signal product line, which is primarily related
to a decrease in revenues from legacy products. These decreases
were partially offset by increased sales from our industrial
product line of $15.5 million.
Net sales for fiscal year 2006 decreased $1.2 million, or
0.6 percent, to $193.7 million from
$194.9 million in fiscal year 2005. Net sales from our
embedded processor products were up $5.6 million in fiscal
year 2006 due to increased revenue from a non-recurring United
States government project, as well as increased demand for ARM
based products and our communications-related products. We also
saw revenue growth in our industrial product line, of which
$0.7 million was due to higher demand for our power meter
products. These increases were offset by a decrease of
$6.8 million in net sales of our video products, as we sold
our digital video related product line during fiscal year 2006.
Net sales of our mixed-signal products decreased
$0.7 million due to various product mix changes between our
digital-to-analog
and
analog-to-digital
converters.
Export sales, principally to Asia, including sales to
U.S.-based
customers with manufacturing plants overseas, were approximately
$112.8 million in fiscal year 2007, $127.6 million in
fiscal year 2006, and $130.6 million in fiscal year 2005.
Export sales to customers located in Asia were 44 percent
of net sales in fiscal year 2007 and 52 percent of net
sales in both fiscal year 2006 and 2005. All other export sales
represented 18 percent, 14 percent, and
15 percent of net sales in fiscal years 2007, 2006, and
2005, respectively.
Our sales are denominated primarily in U.S. dollars. During
fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005, we did not enter into any
foreign currency hedging contracts.
During fiscal year 2006, Avnet, Inc. acquired Memec Holdings
Group. In the past, Memec Holdings Group was our largest
distributor. Sales to Avnet, Inc. (formerly Memec Holdings
Group) represented 29 percent, 25 percent, and
27 percent in fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005,
respectively. No other customers or distributors accounted for
10 percent or more of net sales in fiscal years 2007, 2006,
or 2005. The loss of a significant customer or a significant
reduction in a customers orders could have an adverse
affect on our sales.
Gross
Margin
Gross margin was 60 percent in fiscal year 2007, up from
54 percent in fiscal year 2006. The improvement in margins
from fiscal year 2006 is mainly due to changes in product mix
and the absence of the video product line. The sale of product
that had been written down in prior fiscal years contributed
approximately $1.9 million, or 1.0 percent, to gross
margins compared to contribution of approximately
$4.1 million, or 2.1 percent, in fiscal year 2006. In
total, excess and obsolete inventory charges increased by
$5.1 million from fiscal year 2006, which decreased gross
margins by 2.8 percentage points.
Gross margin was 54 percent in fiscal year 2006, up from
48 percent in fiscal year 2005. In fiscal year 2006, we
completed the sale of our digital video product line assets.
Product mix changes and changes associated with selling the
digital video product line assets resulted in an increase to
gross margins of approximately 2.1 percentage points. The
sale of product that had been written down in prior fiscal years
contributed approximately $4.1 million, or 2.1 percent
of gross margin percentage compared with 1.4 percent
contribution to margin in fiscal year 2005. In total, excess and
obsolete inventory charges decreased by $7.8 million from
fiscal year 2005, which increased gross margins by
4.0 percentage points.
Research
and Development Expenses
Fiscal year 2007 research and development expenses decreased
$1.8 million from fiscal year 2006 due to a decrease in
expenses associated with the divestiture of the digital video
product line. Amortization of intangibles decreased by
Page 22 of 65
$1.4 million from the prior year, $0.7 million of
which was attributable to the absence of amortization on
intangibles we sold to Magnum Semiconductor Inc.
(Magnum) as part of the divestiture. The divestiture
also led to a $1.3 million decrease in salaries due to
lower average headcount, lower vacation expenses, and lower tax
expense. These decreases were partially offset by a
$1.4 million increase in stock compensation expense
associated with the fiscal year 2007 adoption of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R)
(SFAS 123(R)), Share-Based
Payment.
Fiscal year 2006 research and development expenses decreased
$34.8 million from fiscal year 2005 due in large part to
the decrease in expenses associated with the sale of the digital
video product line assets in early fiscal year 2006 and our cost
savings measures from fiscal year 2005. Research and development
expenses, including amortization of acquired intangibles,
decreased as a percentage of net sales to 23.6 percent in
fiscal year 2006 from 41.3 percent in fiscal year 2005.
Amortization of acquired intangibles decreased from
$13.7 million in fiscal year 2005 to $1.4 million in
fiscal year 2006.
Selling,
General and Administrative Expenses
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased
$0.5 million in fiscal year 2007 compared to fiscal year
2006. This is primarily due to a $2.2 million increase in
stock compensation expense associated with the fiscal year 2007
adoption of SFAS 123(R) and the recognition of
$1.7 million in loss contingencies on facilities we
currently sublease. These increases were partially offset by a
decrease in professional fees associated with the conclusion of
the Magnum divestiture and the resolution of certain outstanding
legal disputes.
Selling, general and administrative expenses increased
$8.8 million in fiscal year 2006 compared to fiscal year
2005. This was primarily due to charges associated with
$4.4 million in loss contingency accruals on certain
properties recently
sub-leased
to a third party by Cirrus Logic during the current year and a
benefit recorded in fiscal year 2005 related to a
$3.0 million release of a use tax accrual coupled with a
refund of $2.3 million related to recovered
non-U.S. goods
and sales tax. Selling, general and administrative expenses
increased as a percentage of net sales from 21.8 percent in
fiscal year 2005 to 26.4 percent in fiscal year 2006.
Restructuring
Costs and Other, net
During fiscal year 2007, we recorded restructuring charges of
$1.1 million to operating expenses primarily related to the
transition of design activities from our Boulder, Colorado
office to our headquarters in Austin, Texas. The restructuring
costs for the closure of the Boulder design center were composed
of $0.7 million in severance and relocation costs and
$0.3 million in facility related charges. Approximately
twenty employees were affected by this action, five of whom
relocated to our Austin headquarters.
During fiscal year 2006, we recorded a restructuring charge of
$3.1 million in operating expenses for severance and
facility related items associated with workforce reductions
related to the sale of the digital video product line assets and
changes to
sub-lease
assumptions regarding exited facilities. This action affected
approximately 10 individuals worldwide and resulted in a net
charge of approximately $0.4 million. In connection with
the digital video product line asset sale, we ceased using
certain leased office space in our Fremont, California location.
Accordingly, we recorded a restructuring charge of
$2.7 million related to the exit from this facility.
Partially offsetting the restructuring charge was
$0.8 million related to the gain on the digital video
product line asset sale. For further detail, see Note 4,
Non-marketable Securities.
During fiscal year 2005, we recorded a net restructuring charge
of $1.5 million in operating expenses for facility
consolidations primarily in California and Texas, an impairment
charge of $5.1 million for technology licenses and
equipment that will no longer be used due to our workforce
reductions and a charge of $2.9 million related to
workforce reductions. We expected to realize approximately
$8.0 million to $12.0 million in savings in annual
research and development and selling, general and administrative
expenses due to the related headcount reductions and facility
consolidation activities. During fiscal year 2006, we did
realize these expected savings as noted earlier in the research
and development discussion. Further, as we continue to monitor
our operating expenses, facility accruals, divestiture
opportunities and space utilizations, we may record additional
restructuring charges related to these items. See Note 10
in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements contained
in Item 8 Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data for further detail.
As of March 31, 2007, we have a remaining restructuring
accrual for all of our past restructurings of $5.8 million,
primarily related to future lease payments net of anticipated
subleases that will be paid over the respective lease terms
through fiscal year 2013.
Page 23 of 65
Impairment
of Non-Marketable Securities
During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007, we determined an
impairment indicator existed related to our cost method
investment in Magnum. We obtained an independent valuation of
the fair value of our cost method investment in Magnum in
accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force
No. 03-1
(EITF
03-1),
The Meaning of
Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments.
Based on the results of the independent valuation, at
March 31, 2007, we recognized an impairment of
$4.3 million to reduce the carrying value of the Magnum
cost method investment to $3.6 million. The impairment was
recorded as a separate line item on the statement of operations
in operating expenses under the caption Impairment of
non-marketable securities. For more details regarding our
investment in Magnum, please see Note 4,
Non-marketable securities.
Acquired
in Process Research and Development
During fiscal year 2007, we acquired 100 percent of the
voting equity interests in Caretta, a company based in Shanghai,
China that specializes in designing power management integrated
circuits for the large, single-cell lithium ion battery market.
In allocating the $11.3 million purchase price, we
immediately recognized an expense of $1.9 million for
research and development that was defined as
in-process at the time of acquisition. This charge
is included in total operating expenses on the consolidated
statement of operations under the caption Acquired in
process research and development. Of the remaining
purchase price, $4.1 million was allocated to acquired
technology, $6.5 million was allocated to goodwill and
$1.2 million was allocated to net liabilities assumed. The
categorizations of costs for the purchase price are estimates as
of March 31, 2007 and are subject to change.
License
Agreement Amendment
During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006, we realized a
gain of $7 million resulting from a one-time payment
received associated with an amendment to an existing licensing
agreement, in which certain rights to Cirrus Logic were
terminated from a prior cross-license agreement. The proceeds
were recorded as a separate line item on the statement of
operations in operating expenses under the heading
License agreement amendment.
Litigation
Settlements
On April 28, 2005, Cirrus Logic, Fujitsu, Ltd.
(Fujitsu), Amkor, Sumitomo, and Cirrus Logics
insurance carriers reached an agreement through an arbitration
process to settle and release all pending claims related to the
alleged failure of certain semiconductor ICs sold by Cirrus
Logic to Fujitsu. These releases included releases between our
insurance carriers and us for any claims related to the
litigation with Fujitsu. As part of the settlement, Fujitsu
received $45 million from Sumitomo, $40 million from
Amkor, and $40 million from Cirrus Logics insurance
carriers. Fujitsu paid us a lump sum in the amount of
$25 million. The final settlement documents were completed
on June 10, 2005, and payment was received on June 16,
2005. Part of the $25 million received from the settlement
represented a recovery of bad debt expense recorded in fiscal
year 2002 of approximately $46.8 million. The
$25 million received was partially offset by approximately
$0.2 million in outside fees associated with this
transaction. The net amount was recorded as a separate line item
as a component of operating expenses during the first quarter of
fiscal year 2006.
Patent
Agreement and Settlements, net
During the third quarter of fiscal year 2005, we released
$0.6 million in legal fees originally accrued in connection
with the fourth quarter fiscal year 2004 transaction with
Broadcom Corporation for certain U.S. and
non-U.S. patents.
The excess accrual was related to differences from our original
estimate and the actual fees incurred related to this
transaction. This item was recorded as a separate line item on
the statement of operations in operating expenses under the
heading Patent agreement and settlements, net.
Realized
Gain on Marketable Securities
During the first quarter of fiscal year 2007, we sold all of our
shares in Prudential Financial Inc. (Prudential) and
realized a gain of $0.2 million. We received these shares
as we were a policy holder at the time of Prudentials
demutualization.
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2006, we recognized a gain
of $0.4 million related to the sale of an investment in
Silicon Laboratories, Inc. (Silicon Labs). Total
proceeds from the sale were $0.4 million. These shares were
received as a result of a prior merger agreement whereby Silicon
Labs acquired Cygnal Integrated Products, Inc.
(Cygnal). This merger agreement stated that all
shareholders in Cygnal, Cirrus Logic included, would receive
shares of stock in Silicon Labs in exchange for their shares in
Cygnal. Further, the agreement stated that, should Cygnal
achieve certain revenue
Page 24 of 65
milestones, the former Cygnal shareholders would receive a
designated amount of stock in Silicon Labs. Cygnal surpassed
certain of those milestones laid out in the merger agreement
and, as a result, Silicon Labs distributed certain shares of its
stock held in escrow to Cirrus Logic in the first quarter of our
2006 fiscal year. Cirrus Logic sold these shares immediately
upon receipt.
During fiscal year 2005, we recognized a gain of
$0.8 million related to sale of Silicon Labs stock
associated with the Cygnal transaction described above. In the
first quarter of fiscal year 2005, we recognized a gain of
$0.7 million on the sale of all of the Companys stock
in Silicon Labs that was received as part of the original merger
agreement between Cygnal and Silicon Labs. Total proceeds from
the sale were $1.2 million. In the fourth quarter of fiscal
year 2005, Cirrus Logic received additional shares in Silicon
Labs as a result of the milestones discussed above. Cirrus Logic
sold these shares immediately and recognized a gain of
$0.1 million.
Interest
Income
Interest income in fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005 was
$13.1 million, $7.5 million, and $3.2 million
respectively. The increase in interest income in fiscal year
2007 compared to fiscal years 2006 and 2005 was primarily due to
higher average cash and cash equivalent balances on which
interest was earned as well as higher interest rates.
Income
Taxes
We recorded an income tax benefit of $8.4 million in fiscal
year 2007 on pre-tax income of $19.5 million, yielding an
effective tax benefit rate of 43.1 percent. Our effective
tax rate was lower than the U.S. statutory rate of
35 percent was primarily the result of the realization of
deferred tax assets that had been fully reserved and the release
of a portion of the valuation allowance on certain deferred tax
assets that have not yet been utilized. Our effective tax rate
also reflected a nonrecurring tax benefit of $0.7 million
that was generated by the reversal of prior year
non-U.S. tax
liabilities due to the expiration of statutes of limitations for
the years in which certain potential
non-U.S. tax
liabilities had existed.
We recorded an income tax benefit of $7.0 million in fiscal
year 2006 on pre-tax income of $45.4 million, yielding an
effective tax benefit rate of 15.5 percent. Our effective
tax rate was lower than the U.S. statutory rate of
35 percent primarily because we benefited from the
realization of deferred tax assets that had been fully reserved.
Our effective tax rate also reflected a nonrecurring tax benefit
of $6.7 million that was generated by the reversal of prior
year
non-U.S. tax
liabilities due to the expiration of statutes of limitations for
the years in which certain potential
non-U.S. tax
liabilities had existed.
We recorded an income tax benefit of $20.8 million for
fiscal year 2005 on a pre-tax loss of $34.3 million,
yielding an effective tax benefit rate of 60.6 percent.
This rate differs from the U.S. statutory rate of
35 percent primarily because we were unable to benefit our
fiscal year 2005 net operating loss due to the full
valuation allowance we had in place on our net deferred tax
assets in that year. We recorded a tax benefit of
$21.3 million, representing the reversal of prior year
U.S. Federal and
non-U.S. tax
liabilities. These reversals were due to the expiration of
statutes of limitations for the years in which certain potential
U.S. and
non-U.S. tax
liabilities had existed. We also incurred $0.5 million of
income taxes that were due in various
non-U.S. jurisdictions
in which we have offices.
In fiscal year 2007, we released $7.8 million of the
valuation allowance that had been placed on our
U.S. deferred tax assets. Based on our recent history of
utilizing deferred tax assets and our expectation to do so again
in the upcoming year, we determined that $7.8 million of
our total deferred tax assets were more likely than not to be
realized. In fiscal years 2006 and 2005, we provided a valuation
allowance equal to our net U.S. deferred tax assets due to
uncertainties regarding whether or not these assets would be
realized. We evaluate the realizability of the deferred tax
assets on a quarterly basis. We have deferred tax assets
generated in
non-U.S. jurisdictions
that we have recognized since it is more likely than not that
these assets will be realized.
Outlook
Our outlook for fiscal year 2008 reinforces our commitment to
drive to consistent operating profitability exclusive of any
unusual, non-recurring events, such as litigation events. Given
current indicators, we expect to maintain operating
profitability, exclusive of unforeseen events, by achieving
revenue growth and continued focus on reducing the cost of our
operations. We remain committed to becoming a consistently
profitable company, which better leverages its engineering and
intellectual property resources to achieve growth.
We are focused on building a leadership position in our
higher-margin audio, analog and mixed-signal product lines. We
believe that the continued worldwide adoption of digital audio
products, as replacements for outdated analog components, will
allow us continued growth opportunities in our audio business.
Our expertise in surround-sound audio presents new opportunities
beyond the traditional AVR market. In addition, we have numerous
products that support
Page 25 of 65
digital televisions applications, low power audio applications,
and new automotive audio applications. We have also expanded our
opportunities in commercial audio markets and several industrial
markets, such as power meters and seismic applications.
Overall, we believe that we are well positioned to address the
current economic environment, but future revenue, costs,
margins, profits and profitability are all influenced by
numerous factors, all of which are inherently difficult to
forecast. Please refer to Item 1A Risk
Factors Affecting Our Business and Prospects, for
additional information on these factors.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
In fiscal year 2007, our operating activities generated
$35.6 million in cash. The positive cash flow from
operating activities is predominantly due to the cash components
of our net income as well as a $2.4 million and
$2.2 million decrease in inventories and accounts
receivable, respectively. These increases were partially offset
by a $3.7 million decrease in accounts payable. During
fiscal year 2006, we generated $59.8 million in cash from
operating activities. The increase in cash during fiscal year
2006 was primarily driven by our operations and the receipt of a
net $24.8 million in cash in connection with the Fujitsu
litigation settlement and a decrease in our inventory of
$7.9 million. Another contributing factor to our increase
in cash was a $3.6 million increase in accounts payable and
the receipt of $7.0 million in connection with certain
amendments to an existing license agreement. These increases to
cash were partially offset by a $2.3 million increase in
accounts receivable and a $1.7 million decrease in accrued
salaries and benefits. During fiscal year 2005, we used
$17.1 million in cash from operating activities. The use of
cash during fiscal year 2005 was primarily driven by our
operations and a decrease in our accounts payable and accrued
liabilities of $16.4 million partially offset by the
decrease in inventory of $3.0 million and accounts
receivable of $1.2 million. We also completed a property
lease buyout during the second quarter of fiscal year 2005
totaling $4.3 million for a leased property that we no
longer occupied in Broomfield, Colorado, which led to a further
reduction of our cash from operating activities.
In fiscal year 2007, we used approximately $71.5 million in
cash for investing activities. This was principally due to the
net purchase of $56.7 million in marketable securities and
our purchase of Caretta for approximately $10.7 million,
net. In addition, during fiscal year 2007 we invested
$3.3 million and $2.0 million in technology and
property, equipment, and capitalized software, respectively.
During fiscal year 2006, we used $28.6 million in cash for
investing activities in large part due to the purchase of
$187.6 million worth of
available-for-sale
securities partially offset by the sale of
available-for-sale
securities of $159.4 million. In addition, we purchased
$2.9 million of equipment and technology licenses. These
amounts were partially offset by a decrease in restricted cash
of $2.1 million related to a decrease in the restricted
balances required by certain outstanding letters of credit.
During fiscal year 2005, we used $65.1 million in cash from
investing activities. This use of cash during fiscal year 2005
is primarily due to the purchase of
available-for-sale
securities of $109.4 million partially offset by the sale
of
available-for-sale
securities of $50.6 million. In addition to the securities,
we purchased $6.7 million of property and equipment and
technology licenses, including multi-year computer-aided design
tool licenses during fiscal year 2005.
During fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005, we generated
$7.2 million, $6.3 million and $3.5 million,
respectively, in cash from financing activities related to the
receipt of cash from common stock issuances as a result of the
exercises of employee stock options and our employee stock
purchase plan.
As of March 31, 2007, we had restricted investments of
$5.8 million, which primarily secures certain obligations
under our lease agreement for our principal facility located in
Austin, Texas. This facility is 197,000 square feet and
houses our headquarters and engineering operations. The lease
agreement for our headquarters and engineering facility includes
a letter of credit in the amount of $5.1 million until
November 2011, at which point the requirement decreases to
$2.6 million with the letter of credit ceasing in May 2012.
Although we cannot assure our stockholders that we will be able
to generate cash in the future, we anticipate that our existing
capital resources and cash flow generated from future operations
will enable us to maintain our current level of operations for
at least the next 12 months.
Page 26 of 65
Off-Balance
Sheet Arrangements
In our business activities, we incur certain commitments to make
future payments under contracts such as purchase orders, leases
and other long-term contracts. Maturities under these contracts
are set forth in the following table as of March 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment due by period (in thousands)
|
|
|
|
<1 year
|
|
|
13 years
|
|
|
35 years
|
|
|
>5 years
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Facilities leases, net
|
|
$
|
6,094
|
|
|
$
|
9,712
|
|
|
$
|
7,733
|
|
|
$
|
1,599
|
|
|
$
|
25,138
|
|
Equipment leases
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
Wafer purchase commitments
|
|
|
4,091
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,091
|
|
Assembly purchase commitments
|
|
|
208
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
208
|
|
Outside test purchase commitments
|
|
|
3,584
|
|
|
|
1,031
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,615
|
|
Other purchase commitments
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
14,031
|
|
|
$
|
10,756
|
|
|
$
|
7,735
|
|
|
$
|
1,599
|
|
|
$
|
34,121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recently
Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In February 2007, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 159 (SFAS 159), The
Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities, which allows entities to measure eligible
financial instruments and certain other items at fair value. The
Statement also establishes presentation and disclosure
requirements designed to facilitate comparisons between
companies that choose different measurement attributes for
similar types of assets and liabilities. SFAS 159 is
effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007. The Company is currently assessing the potential effect,
if any, of implementing this standard.
In September 2006, the FASB issued Statement of Financial
Accounting Standards No. 157 (SFAS 157),
Fair Value Measurements, which defines fair
value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and
expands disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS 157
is effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company
is currently assessing the potential effect, if any, of
implementing this standard.
In June 2006, the FASB issued Financial Interpretation
No. 48 (FIN 48), Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes. FIN 48 clarifies the
application of SFAS No. 109 by providing detailed
guidance for the financial statement recognition, measurement
and disclosure of uncertain tax positions recognized in an
enterprises financial statements. Tax positions must meet
a more-likely-than-not recognition threshold at the
effective date to be recognized upon the adoption of FIN 48
and in subsequent periods. We will be adopting FIN 48 as of
April 1, 2007, the first day of our 2008 fiscal year. The
Company is currently evaluating the potential effects, if any,
of FIN 48 on its consolidated financial statements.
Critical
Accounting Policies
Our discussion and analysis of the Companys financial
condition and results of operations are based upon the
consolidated financial statements included in this report, which
have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally
accepted accounting principles. The preparation of these
financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments
that affect the reported amounts. We evaluate the estimates on
an on-going basis. We base these estimates on historical
experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to
be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form
the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of
assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other
sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under
different assumptions and conditions. We also have policies that
we consider to be key accounting policies, such as our policies
for revenue recognition, including the deferral of revenues and
cost of sales on sales to our distributors, and our stock option
granting practices; however, these policies do not meet the
definition of critical accounting estimates because they do not
generally require us to make estimates or judgments that are
difficult or subjective.
We believe the following critical accounting policies involve
significant judgments and estimates that are used in the
preparation of the consolidated financial statements:
|
|
|
|
|
For purposes of determining the variables used in the
calculation of stock compensation expense under the provisions
of the Financial Accounting Standards Boards
(FASB) Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 123(R) (SFAS No. 123(R)), we
perform an analysis of current market data and historical
company data to
|
Page 27 of 65
|
|
|
|
|
calculate an estimate of implied volatility, the expected term
of the option and the expected forfeiture rate. With the
exception of the expected forfeiture rate, which is not an
input, we use these estimates as variables in the Black-Scholes
option pricing model. Depending upon the number of stock options
granted, any fluctuations in these calculations could have a
material effect on the results presented in our Consolidated
Condensed Statement of Operations. In addition, any differences
between estimated forfeitures and actual forfeitures could also
have a material impact on our financial statements. See
Note 12 in the Notes to our Consolidated Condensed
Financials Statements contained in
Item 1 Financial Statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
We maintain allowances for doubtful accounts for estimated
losses resulting from the inability or failure of our customers
to make required payments. We regularly evaluate our allowance
for doubtful accounts based upon the age of the receivable, our
ongoing customer relations, as well as any disputes with the
customer. If the financial condition of our customers were to
deteriorate, resulting in an impairment of their ability to make
payments, additional allowances may be required, which could
have a material effect on our operating results and financial
position. Additionally, we may maintain an allowance for
doubtful accounts for estimated losses on receivables from
customers with whom we are involved in litigation. See
Note 3 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial
Statements contained in Item 8
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
|
|
|
|
Inventories are recorded at the lower of cost or market, with
cost being determined on a
first-in,
first-out basis. We write down inventories to net realizable
value based on forecasted demand, management judgment and the
age of inventory. Actual demand and market conditions may be
different from those projected by management, which could have a
material effect on our operating results and financial position.
See Note 1 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial
Statements contained in Item 8
Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
|
|
|
|
We evaluate the recoverability of property and equipment and
intangible assets in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standard No. 144 (SFAS 144),
Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived
Assets. We test for impairment losses on long-lived
assets used in operations when indicators of impairment are
present and the undiscounted cash flows estimated to be
generated by those assets are less than the assets
carrying amounts. An impairment loss is recognized in the event
the carrying value of these assets exceeds the fair value of the
applicable assets. Impairment evaluations involve management
estimates of asset useful lives and future cash flows. Actual
useful lives and cash flows could be different from those
estimated by management, which could have a material effect on
our operating results and financial position. See Note 6 in
the Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements contained in
Item 8 Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data.
|
|
|
|
Our
available-for-sale
investments, non-marketable securities and other investments are
subject to a periodic impairment review pursuant to Emerging
Issues Task Force
No. 03-1
(EITF
03-1),
The Meaning of
Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments.
Investments are considered to be impaired when a decline in
fair value is judged to be
other-than-temporary.
This determination requires significant judgment and actual
results may be materially different than our estimate.
Marketable securities are evaluated for impairment if the
decline in fair value below cost basis is significant
and/or has
lasted for an extended period of time. Non-marketable securities
or other investments are considered to be impaired when a
decline in fair value is judged to be
other-than-temporary.
For investments accounted for using the cost method of
accounting, we evaluate information (e.g., budgets, business
plans, financial statements, etc.) in addition to quoted market
price, if any, in determining whether an
other-than-temporary
decline in value exists. Factors indicative of an
other-than-temporary
decline include recurring operating losses, credit defaults and
subsequent rounds of financings at an amount below the cost
basis of the investment. This list is not all inclusive and we
weigh all quantitative and qualitative factors in determining if
an
other-than-temporary
decline in value of an investment has occurred. When a decline
in value is deemed to be
other-than-temporary,
we recognize an impairment loss in the current periods
operating results to the extent of the decline. Actual values
could be different from those estimated by management, which
could have a material effect on our operating results and
financial position. See Notes 2 and 4 in the Notes to our
Consolidated Financial Statements contained in
Item 8 Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data.
|
|
|
|
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 109 (SFAS No. 109),
Accounting for Income Taxes, we provide for
the recognition of deferred tax assets if realization of such
assets is more likely than not. We have provided a valuation
allowance against a substantial portion of our net
U.S. deferred tax assets due to uncertainties regarding
their realization. We evaluate the realizability of our deferred
tax assets on a quarterly basis by determining whether or not
the anticipated pre-tax income for the upcoming twelve months is
expected to be sufficient to utilize the deferred tax assets
that we have recognized. If our future income is not sufficient
to utilize the deferred tax assets that we have recognized, we
increase the valuation allowance to the
|
Page 28 of 65
|
|
|
|
|
point at which all of the remaining recognized deferred tax
assets will be utilized by the anticipated future pre-tax income
for the next twelve months. An increase in the valuation
allowance results in a simultaneous increase to income tax
expense or, in some cases, a decrease in contributed capital. If
our anticipated future pre-tax income is sufficient to conclude
that additional deferred tax assets should be recognized, we
decrease the valuation allowance. This results in a simultaneous
decrease to income tax expense or, possibly, an increase in
contributed capital. See Note 14 in the Notes to our
Consolidated Financial Statements contained in
Item 8 Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our taxes payable balance is comprised primarily of tax
contingencies that are recorded to address exposures involving
tax positions we have taken that could be challenged by taxing
authorities. These exposures result from the varying application
of statutes, rules, regulations, and interpretations. Our tax
contingencies relate to transfer pricing positions we have taken
in a variety of countries in which we operate. The ultimate
resolution of these matters may be materially greater or less
than the amount that we have accrued. See Note 14 in the
Notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements contained in
Item 8 Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data.
|
|
|
|
Restructuring charges for workforce reductions and facilities
consolidations reflected in the accompanying financial
statements were accrued based upon specific plans established by
management, in accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force
No. 94-3
(EITF 94-3),
Liability Recognition for Certain Employee Termination
Benefits and Other Costs to Exit an Activity (including Certain
Costs Incurred in a Restructuring) or SFAS 146,
Accounting for Costs Associated with Exit or Disposal
Activities depending upon the time of the
restructuring activity. We use an estimated borrowing rate as
the discount rate for all of our restructuring accruals made
under SFAS 146. Our facilities consolidation accruals are
based upon our estimates as to the length of time a facility
would be vacant, as well as the amount of sublease income we
would receive once we sublet the facility, after considering
current and projected market conditions. Changes in these
estimates could result in an adjustment to our restructuring
accruals in a future quarter, which could have a material effect
on our operating results and financial position. See
Note 10 in the Notes to our Consolidated Financial
Statements contained in
Item 8 Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data.
|
|
|
|
We are subject to the possibility of loss contingencies for
various legal matters. See Note 8 in the Notes to our
Consolidated Financial Statements contained in
Item 8 Financial Statements and
Supplementary Data. We regularly evaluate current
information available to us to determine whether any accruals
should be made based on the status of the case, the results of
the discovery process and other factors. If we ultimately
determine that an accrual should be made for a legal matter,
this accrual could have a material effect on our operating
results and financial position and the ultimate outcome may be
materially different than our estimate.
|
|
|
ITEM 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
|
We are exposed to market risks associated with interest rates on
our debt-related investments and currency movements on
non-U.S. dollar
denominated assets and liabilities. We assess these risks on a
regular basis and have established policies to protect against
the adverse effects of these and other potential exposures. All
of the potential changes noted below are based on sensitivity
analyses at March 31, 2007. Actual results may differ
materially.
Interest
Rate Risk
At March 31, 2007, an immediate one percent, or
100 basis points, increase or decrease in interest rates
could result in a $2.6 million fluctuation in our annual
interest income. We believe the risks associated with
fluctuating interest rates are limited to our annual interest
income and not the underlying principal as we generally have the
ability to hold debt related investments to maturity. At
March 25, 2006, an immediate one percent, or 100 basis
points, increase or decrease in interest rates could have
resulted in a $2.1 million fluctuation in our annual
interest income. As with fiscal year 2007, the risks associated
with fluctuating interest rates were limited to our annual
interest income and not the underlying principal as we generally
have the ability to hold debt related investments to maturity.
The increased interest rate risk is based solely on an increase
in total cash and marketable securities. The amounts disclosed
in this paragraph are based on a 100 basis point
fluctuation in interest rates applied to the average cash
balance for that fiscal year.
Foreign
Currency Exchange Risk
Our revenue and spending is transacted primarily in
U.S. dollars; however, in fiscal years 2007, 2006 and 2005,
we entered into minimal transactions in other currencies to fund
the operating needs of our design, technical support and sales
offices outside of the U.S. As of March 31, 2007 and
March 25, 2006, a ten percent change in the value of the
related currencies would not have a material impact on our
results of operations and financial position.
Page 29 of 65
In addition to the direct effects of changes in exchange rates
on the value of open exchange contracts, we may, from time to
time, have changes in exchange rates that can also affect the
volume of sales or the foreign currency sales prices of our
products and the relative costs of operations based overseas.
Non-Marketable
Securities Risk
Our investments in non-marketable securities are affected by
many of the same factors that could result in an adverse
movement of market prices, although the impact cannot be
directly quantified. Such a movement and the underlying economic
conditions would negatively affect the prospects of the
companies we invest in, their ability to raise additional
capital and the likelihood of our being able to realize our
investments through liquidity events such as initial public
offerings, mergers or private sales. These types of investments
involve a great deal of risk, and there can be no assurance that
any specific company will grow or become successful;
consequently, we could lose all or part of our investment. At
March 31, 2007, our investment in non-marketable securities
had a carrying amount of $3.6 million. The carrying amount
of this investment approximated fair value as of March 31,
2007. As of March 25, 2006, that same investment had a
carrying value of $7.9 million. This carrying amount
approximated fair value as of March 25, 2006.
ITEM
8. Financial Statements and Supplementary
Data
Index to
Consolidated Financial Statements
Page 30 of 65
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Cirrus Logic, Inc.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
Cirrus Logic, Inc. as of March 31, 2007 and March 25,
2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three
fiscal years in the period ended March 31, 2007. These
financial statements are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements 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 Cirrus Logic, Inc. at March 31, 2007
and March 25, 2006, and the consolidated results of its
operations and its cash flows for each of the three fiscal years
in the period ended March 31, 2007, in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States),
the effectiveness of Cirrus Logic Inc.s internal control
over financial reporting as of March 31, 2007, based on
criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission and our report dated June 1, 2007
expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
As discussed in Note 12 to the consolidated financial
statements, effective March 26, 2006, the Company changed
its method of accounting for stock-based compensation to conform
to Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R),
Share-Based Payment.
Austin, Texas
May 31, 2007
Page 31 of 65
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
On Internal Control over Financial Reporting
The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Cirrus Logic, Inc.
We have audited managements assessment, included in the
accompanying Managements Annual Report on Internal Control
Over Financial Reporting, that Cirrus Logic, Inc. maintained
effective internal control over financial reporting as of
March 31, 2007, based on criteria established in Internal
Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee
of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO
criteria). Cirrus Logic, Inc.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. Our responsibility is
to express an opinion on managements assessment and an
opinion on the effectiveness of the companys internal
control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, evaluating
managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing
such other procedures as we considered necessary in the
circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable
basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, managements assessment that Cirrus Logic,
Inc. maintained effective internal control over financial
reporting as of March 31, 2007, is fairly stated, in all
material respects, based on the COSO criteria. Also, in our
opinion, Cirrus Logic, Inc. maintained, in all material
respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as
of March 31, 2007, 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 Cirrus Logic, Inc. as of
March 31, 2007 and March 25, 2006, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, changes in
stockholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three
fiscal years in the period ended March 31, 2007 of Cirrus
Logic, Inc., and our report dated May 31, 2007 expressed an
unqualified opinion thereon.
Austin, Texas
May 31, 2007
Page 32 of 65
CIRRUS
LOGIC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Assets
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
87,960
|
|
|
$
|
116,675
|
|
Restricted investments
|
|
|
5,755
|
|
|
|
5,755
|
|
Marketable securities
|
|
|
178,000
|
|
|
|
102,335
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
|
19,127
|
|
|
|
20,937
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
16,496
|
|
|
|
18,708
|
|
Prepaid assets
|
|
|
1,982
|
|
|
|
2,488
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
11,717
|
|
|
|
5,259
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
321,037
|
|
|
|
272,157
|
|
Long-term marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,703
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
|
11,407
|
|
|
|
14,051
|
|
Intangibles, net
|
|
|
8,550
|
|
|
|
2,966
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
6,461
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment in Magnum Semiconductor
|
|
|
3,657
|
|
|
|
7,947
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
1,948
|
|
|
|
3,217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
353,060
|
|
|
$
|
319,041
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and
Stockholders Equity
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
10,434
|
|
|
$
|
14,129
|
|
Accrued salaries and benefits
|
|
|
7,816
|
|
|
|
6,460
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
1,561
|
|
|
|
2,228
|
|
Deferred income on shipments to
distributors
|
|
|
4,290
|
|
|
|
7,098
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
10,519
|
|
|
|
10,053
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
34,620
|
|
|
|
39,968
|
|
Lease commitments and contingencies
|
|
|
4,769
|
|
|
|
5,590
|
|
Long-term restructuring accrual
|
|
|
3,418
|
|
|
|
4,694
|
|
Other long-term liabilities
|
|
|
5,316
|
|
|
|
4,519
|
|
Stockholders Equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.001 par
value, 280,000 shares authorized, 88,163 shares and
86,816 shares issued and outstanding at March 31, 2007
and March 25, 2006, respectively
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
926,812
|
|
|
|
914,148
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(621,180
|
)
|
|
|
(649,075
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive
loss
|
|
|
(783
|
)
|
|
|
(890
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity
|
|
|
304,937
|
|
|
|
264,270
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
353,060
|
|
|
$
|
319,041
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
Page 33 of 65
CIRRUS
LOGIC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS
(in thousands, except per share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
182,304
|
|
|
$
|
193,694
|
|
|
$
|
194,900
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
|
73,290
|
|
|
|
88,502
|
|
|
|
101,638
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
109,014
|
|
|
|
105,192
|
|
|
|
93,262
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
43,961
|
|
|
|
45,772
|
|
|
|
80,549
|
|
Selling, general and administrative
|
|
|
51,755
|
|
|
|
51,271
|
|
|
|
42,459
|
|
Restructuring costs and other, net
|
|
|
1,106
|
|
|
|
2,311
|
|
|
|
9,463
|
|
Impairment of non-marketable
securities
|
|
|
4,290
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquired in process research and
development
|
|
|
1,925
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Litigation settlement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(24,758
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
License agreement amendment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7,000
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Patent agreement and settlements,
net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(593
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses
|
|
|
103,037
|
|
|
|
67,596
|
|
|
|
131,878
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations
|
|
|
5,977
|
|
|
|
37,596
|
|
|
|
(38,616
|
)
|
Realized gain on marketable
securities
|
|
|
193
|
|
|
|
388
|
|
|
|
806
|
|
Interest income
|
|
|
13,146
|
|
|
|
7,461
|
|
|
|
3,208
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net
|
|
|
177
|
|
|
|
(54
|
)
|
|
|
317
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
19,493
|
|
|
|
45,391
|
|
|
|
(34,285
|
)
|
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
(8,402
|
)
|
|
|
(7,035
|
)
|
|
|
(20,789
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
27,895
|
|
|
$
|
52,426
|
|
|
$
|
(13,496
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings (loss) per share:
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
|
$
|
0.61
|
|
|
$
|
(0.16
|
)
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per share
|
|
$
|
0.31
|
|
|
$
|
0.60
|
|
|
$
|
(0.16
|
)
|
Weighted average common shares
outstanding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
87,643
|
|
|
|
86,036
|
|
|
|
84,746
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
88,805
|
|
|
|
87,775
|
|
|
|
84,746
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
Page 34 of 65
CIRRUS
LOGIC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Cash flows from operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
27,895
|
|
|
$
|
52,426
|
|
|
$
|
(13,496
|
)
|
Adjustments to reconcile net
income (loss) to net cash (used in) provided by operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
6,382
|
|
|
|
8,511
|
|
|
|
24,157
|
|
Acquired in-process research and
development
|
|
|
1,925
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss (gain) on retirement or
write-off of long-lived assets
|
|
|
235
|
|
|
|
(821
|
)
|
|
|
5,936
|
|
Amortization of lease settlement
|
|
|
(746
|
)
|
|
|
(995
|
)
|
|
|
(3,778
|
)
|
Property lease buyout
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,343
|
)
|
Realized gain on marketable
securities
|
|
|
(193
|
)
|
|
|
(388
|
)
|
|
|
(806
|
)
|
Stock compensation expense
|
|
|
5,481
|
|
|
|
2,121
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
Impairment of non-marketable
securities
|
|
|
4,290
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
|
2,150
|
|
|
|
(2,344
|
)
|
|
|
1,211
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
2,396
|
|
|
|
6,976
|
|
|
|
2,983
|
|
Deferred tax assets
|
|
|
(7,553
|
)
|
|
|
(340
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
1,623
|
|
|
|
(1,276
|
)
|
|
|
2,412
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
(3,721
|
)
|
|
|
3,583
|
|
|
|
(8,721
|
)
|
Accrued salaries and benefits
|
|
|
1,196
|
|
|
|
(1,704
|
)
|
|
|
(1,295
|
)
|
Deferred income on shipments to
distributors
|
|
|
(2,808
|
)
|
|
|
(837
|
)
|
|
|
4,429
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
(667
|
)
|
|
|
(7,048
|
)
|
|
|
(20,831
|
)
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
(2,260
|
)
|
|
|
1,952
|
|
|
|
(6,429
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities
|
|
|
35,625
|
|
|
|
59,816
|
|
|
|
(17,103
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of marketable
securities
|
|
|
161,524
|
|
|
|
159,777
|
|
|
|
50,630
|
|
Purchases of available for sale
marketable securities
|
|
|
(218,186
|
)
|
|
|
(187,605
|
)
|
|
|
(109,377
|
)
|
Purchases of property and equipment
|
|
|
(1,981
|
)
|
|
|
(2,198
|
)
|
|
|
(3,621
|
)
|
Investments in technology
|
|
|
(3,282
|
)
|
|
|
(729
|
)
|
|
|
(3,146
|
)
|
Acquisition of Caretta Integrated
Circuits, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
(10,713
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of property and
equipment
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Increase) decrease in deposits
and other assets
|
|
|
1,062
|
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
187
|
|
Decrease in restricted investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,143
|
|
|
|
261
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing
activities
|
|
|
(71,524
|
)
|
|
|
(28,630
|
)
|
|
|
(65,066
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of common stock, net of
issuance costs
|
|
|
7,184
|
|
|
|
6,254
|
|
|
|
3,511
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing
activities
|
|
|
7,184
|
|
|
|
6,254
|
|
|
|
3,511
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(28,715
|
)
|
|
|
37,440
|
|
|
|
(78,658
|
)
|
Cash and cash equivalents at
beginning of year
|
|
|
116,675
|
|
|
|
79,235
|
|
|
|
157,893
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end
of year
|
|
$
|
87,960
|
|
|
$
|
116,675
|
|
|
$
|
79,235
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures of
cash flow information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash payments (refunds) during the
year for:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Income taxes
|
|
|
(165
|
)
|
|
|
333
|
|
|
|
(1,646
|
)
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
Page 35 of 65
CIRRUS
LOGIC, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
(in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Income (Loss)
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Balance, March 27, 2004
|
|
|
84,395
|
|
|
$
|
84
|
|
|
$
|
900,797
|
|
|
$
|
(688,005
|
)
|
|
$
|
(171
|
)
|
|
|
212,705
|
|
Components of comprehensive income
(loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,496
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13,496
|
)
|
Change in unrealized loss on
marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(313
|
)
|
|
|
(313
|
)
|
Realized gain on marketable
securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(669
|
)
|
|
|
(669
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,478
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of stock under stock plans
|
|
|
811
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
3,510
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,511
|
|
Amortization of deferred stock
compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 26, 2005
|
|
|
85,206
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
905,775
|
|
|
|
(701,501
|
)
|
|
|
(1,153
|
)
|
|
|
203,206
|
|
Components of comprehensive income
(loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,426
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,426
|
|
Change in unrealized loss on
marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
263
|
|
|
|
263
|
|
Realized gain on marketable
securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,689
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of stock under stock plans
|
|
|
1,610
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
6,252
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,254
|
|
Amortization of deferred stock
compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,121
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 25, 2006
|
|
|
86,816
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
914,148
|
|
|
|
(649,075
|
)
|
|
|
(890
|
)
|
|
|
264,270
|
|
Components of comprehensive income
(loss):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,895
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,895
|
|
Change in unrealized loss on
marketable securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
|
|
300
|
|
Realized gain on marketable
securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(193
|
)
|
|
|
(193
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28,002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of stock under stock plans
|
|
|
1,347
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
7,183
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,184
|
|
Stock compensation expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 31, 2007
|
|
|
88,163
|
|
|
$
|
88
|
|
|
$
|
926,812
|
|
|
$
|
(621,180
|
)
|
|
$
|
(783
|
)
|
|
$
|
304,937
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial
statements.
Page 36 of 65
CIRRUS
LOGIC, INC.
|
|
1.
|
Description
of Business and Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies
|
Description
of Business
Cirrus Logic, Inc. (Cirrus Logic,
Cirrus, We, Us,
Our, or the Company) develops
high-precision analog and mixed-signal integrated circuits
(ICs) for a broad range of consumer and industrial
markets. Building on our diverse analog mixed-signal patent
portfolio, Cirrus Logic delivers highly optimized products for
consumer and commercial audio, automotive entertainment and
industrial applications. We develop and market ICs and embedded
software used by original equipment manufacturers. We also
provide complete system reference designs based on our
technology that enable our customers to bring products to market
in a timely and cost-effective manner.
We were founded in 1984 and were reincorporated in the State of
Delaware in February 1999. Our headquarters and engineering
facility are in Austin, Texas with design centers in Beijing and
Shanghai in the Peoples Republic of China and Shanghai,
the Peoples Republic of China and sales locations
throughout the United States. We also serve customers from
international sales offices in Europe and Asia, including the
Peoples Republic of China, Hong Kong, South Korea, Japan,
Singapore, and Taiwan. Our common stock, which has been publicly
traded since 1989, is listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market
under the symbol CRUS.
Basis of
Presentation
We prepare financial statements on a 52- or
53-week year
that ends on the last Saturday in March. Fiscal year 2007 was a
53-week year
whereas fiscal years 2006 and 2005 were
52-week
years.
Principles
of Consolidation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been
prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted
accounting principles and include the accounts of the Company
and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All significant intercompany
balances and transactions have been eliminated.
Use of
Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in accordance with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles require the
use of management estimates. These estimates are subjective in
nature and involve judgments that affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities at fiscal year end and the reported amounts of
revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results
could differ from these estimates.
Cash and
Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents consist primarily of money market
funds, commercial paper, U.S. Government Treasury and
Agency instruments with original maturities of three months or
less at the date of purchase.
Restricted
Investments
As of March 31, 2007 and March 25, 2006, we had
restricted investments of $5.8 million in support of our
letter of credit needs. The letters of credit primarily secure
certain obligations under our operating lease agreement for our
headquarters and engineering facility in Austin, Texas and are
scheduled for periodic declines in amount. For more details, see
Note 7.
Marketable
Securities
We determine the appropriate classification of marketable
securities at the time of purchase and reevaluate this
designation as of each balance sheet date. We classify these
securities as either
held-to-maturity,
trading, or
available-for-sale
in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 115 (SFAS 115), Accounting
for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities.
As of March 31, 2007 and March 25, 2006, all
marketable securities and restricted investments were classified
as
available-for-sale
securities.
Available-for-sale
securities are carried at fair value, with unrealized gains and
losses included as a component of accumulated other
comprehensive income (loss). The amortized cost of debt
securities in this category is adjusted for amortization of
premiums and accretion of discounts to maturity computed under
the effective interest method and is
Page 37 of 65
included in interest income. Realized gains and losses, declines
in value judged to be other than temporary and interest on
available-for-sale
securities are included in net income. The cost of securities
sold is based on the specific identification method.
Inventories
We use the lower of cost or market method to value our
inventories, with cost being determined on a
first-in,
first-out basis. One of the factors we consistently evaluate in
the application of this method is the extent to which products
are accepted into the marketplace. By policy, we evaluate market
acceptance based on known business factors and conditions by
comparing forecasted customer unit demand for our products over
a specific future period, or demand horizon, to quantities on
hand at the end of each accounting period.
On a quarterly and annual basis, we analyze inventories on a
part-by-part
basis. Inventory quantities on hand in excess of forecasted
demand are considered to have reduced market value and,
therefore, the cost basis is adjusted to the lower of cost or
market. Typically, market values for excess or obsolete
inventories are considered to be zero. The short product life
cycles and the competitive nature of the industry are factors
considered in the estimation of customer unit demand at the end
of each quarterly accounting period.
Inventories were comprised of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Work in process
|
|
$
|
6,646
|
|
|
$
|
10,662
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
|
9,850
|
|
|
|
8,046
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories
|
|
$
|
16,496
|
|
|
$
|
18,708
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property
and Equipment, net
Property and equipment is recorded at cost, net of depreciation
and amortization. Depreciation and amortization is calculated on
a straight-line basis over estimated economic lives, ranging
from three to ten years. Leasehold improvements are depreciated
over the shorter of the term of the lease or the estimated
useful life. Furniture, fixtures, machinery, and equipment are
all depreciated over a useful life of 5 years. In general,
our capitalized software is depreciated over a useful life of
3 years, with capitalized enterprise resource planning
software being depreciated over a useful life of 10 years.
Gains or losses related to retirements or dispositions of fixed
assets are recognized in the period incurred.
Property and equipment was comprised of the following (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Furniture and fixtures
|
|
$
|
4,383
|
|
|
$
|
4,331
|
|
Leasehold improvements
|
|
|
11,900
|
|
|
|
13,369
|
|
Machinery and equipment
|
|
|
20,970
|
|
|
|
20,414
|
|
Capitalized software
|
|
|
17,961
|
|
|
|
17,926
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property and equipment
|
|
|
55,214
|
|
|
|
56,040
|
|
Less: Accumulated depreciation and
amortization
|
|
|
(43,807
|
)
|
|
|
(41,989
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net
|
|
$
|
11,407
|
|
|
$
|
14,051
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization expense on property and equipment
for fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005 was $4.6 million,
$5.1 million, and $7.1 million, respectively.
Non-Marketable
Securities and Other Investments
Investments in companies in which Cirrus does not have
significant influence are accounted for at cost if the
investment is not publicly traded. These non-marketable
securities and other investments have been classified as other
current assets, other assets, or specifically identified in
accordance with Accounting Principles
Bulletin No. 18, The Equity Method of
Accounting for Investments in Common Stock. Dividends
and other distributions of earnings from investments accounted
for at cost are included in income when declared. Any gain will
be recorded at the time of liquidation of the non-marketable
security or other investment.
Page 38 of 65
Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment
All of the Companys
available-for-sale
investments, non-marketable securities and other investments are
subject to a periodic impairment review pursuant to Emerging
Issues Task Force
No. 03-1
(EITF
03-1),
The Meaning of
Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments.
Investments are considered to be impaired when a decline in fair
value is judged to be
other-than-temporary.
Marketable securities are evaluated for impairment if the
decline in fair value below cost basis is significant
and/or has
lasted for an extended period of time. Non-marketable securities
or other investments are considered to be impaired when a
decline in fair value is judged to be
other-than-temporary.
For investments accounted for using the cost method of
accounting, management evaluates information (e.g., budgets,
business plans, financial statements, etc.) in addition to
quoted market price, if any, in determining whether an
other-than-temporary
decline in value exists. Factors indicative of an
other-than-temporary
decline include recurring operating losses, credit defaults and
subsequent rounds of financings at an amount below the cost
basis of the investment. When a decline in value is deemed to be
other-than-temporary,
Cirrus recognizes an impairment loss in the current
periods operating results to the extent of the decline.
Intangibles,
net
Intangible assets include purchased technology licenses that are
recorded at cost and are amortized on a straight-line basis over
their useful lives, generally ranging from three to five years.
Acquired intangibles recorded in connection with our
acquisitions, include existing technology, core
technology/patents, license agreements, trademarks, covenants
not-to-compete
and customer agreements. These assets are amortized on a
straight-line basis over lives ranging from one to ten years.
Long-Lived
Assets
In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standard
No. 144 (SFAS 144), Accounting
for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets,
we test for impairment losses on long-lived assets used in
operations when indicators of impairment are present and the
undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those
assets are less than the assets carrying amounts. We
measure any impairment loss by comparing the fair value of the
asset to its carrying amount. We estimate fair value based on
discounted future cash flows, quoted market prices, or
independent appraisals.
Foreign
Currency Translation
All of our international subsidiaries have the U.S. dollar
as the functional currency. The local currency financial
statements are remeasured into U.S. dollars using current
rates of exchange for assets and liabilities. Gains and losses
from remeasurement are included in other income (expense), net.
Revenue and expenses from our international subsidiaries are
translated using the monthly average exchange rates in effect
for the period in which the items occur. For all periods
presented, our foreign currency translation expense was not
significant.
Concentration
of Credit Risk
Financial instruments that potentially subject us to material
concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash
equivalents, restricted investments, marketable securities,
long-term marketable securities and trade accounts receivable.
We are exposed to credit risk to the extent of the amounts
recorded on the balance sheet. By policy, our cash equivalents,
restricted investments, marketable securities and long-term
marketable securities are subject to certain nationally
recognized credit standards, issuer concentrations, sovereign
risk and marketability or liquidity considerations.
In evaluating our trade receivables, we perform credit
evaluations of our major customers financial condition and
monitor closely all of our receivables to limit our financial
exposure by limiting the length of time and amount of credit
extended. We sell a significant amount of products in the Asia
countries. In certain situations, we may require payment in
advance or utilize letters of credit to reduce credit risk. By
policy, we establish a reserve for trade accounts receivable
based on the type of business in which a customer is engaged,
the length of time a trade account receivable is outstanding and
other knowledge that we may possess relating to the probability
that a trade receivable is at risk for non-payment.
The following table summarizes the receivable balance of a
distributor that represented more than 10 percent of
consolidated gross short-term accounts receivable:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
2006
|
|
Avnet, Inc. (formerly Memec Group
Holdings)
|
|
|
24
|
%
|
|
|
28
|
%
|
Page 39 of 65
No other distributors or customers had receivable balances that
represented more than 10 percent of consolidated gross
short-term accounts receivable as of the end of fiscal years
2007 and 2006.
Sales to one distributor, Avnet, Inc. (formerly Memec Holdings
Group), represented 29 percent, 25 percent and
27 percent of total sales in fiscal years 2007, 2006 and
2005, respectively. No other customers or distributors accounted
for 10 percent or more of net sales in fiscal years 2007,
2006 and 2005. The loss of a significant customer or distributor
or a significant reduction in a customers or distributors orders
could have an adverse effect on our sales.
We recognize revenue in accordance with the Securities and
Exchange Commissions Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 104 (SAB 104),
Revenue Recognition. Revenue from product
sold directly to customers and to certain international
distributors is recognized upon title passage of inventory. For
sales made directly to domestic customers, title generally
passes upon shipment. For sales made directly to international
customers and to international distributors, title generally
passes at the port of destination, which coincides with delivery
to the international distributors. Sales made to domestic
distributors are recorded as deferred revenue until the final
sale to the end customer has occurred as the distributor
agreements allow certain rights of return, price adjustments and
price protection. License and royalty revenue is recognized as
it is earned per unit shipped or when a milestone is reached.
We warrant that the products, when delivered, will be free from
defects in material workmanship under normal use and service.
Our obligations are limited to replacing, repairing or giving
credit for, at our option, any products that are returned within
one year after the date of shipment and if notice is given to us
in writing within 30 days of the customer learning of such
problem. Warranty expense was not significant for any period
presented.
Our shipping and handling costs are included in cost of sales
for all periods presented.
Advertising costs are expensed as incurred. Advertising costs
were $1.2 million, $1.1 million, and $1.7 million
in fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) issued Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 123(R) Share-Based
Payment, which supersedes Accounting Principles Board
Opinion No. 25 (APB No. 25),
Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees,
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation and related implementation guidance. We
adopted this pronouncement as of March 26, 2006, the first
day of our 2007 fiscal year.
In periods prior to adoption, we applied the intrinsic value
method in accounting for our stock option and stock purchase
plans in accordance with APB No. 25. In December 2002, the
FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standard
No. 148 (SFAS 148), Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation Transition and
Disclosure, which affects us only with regard to
quarterly and annual reporting of the pro forma effect on net
income and earnings per share resulting from the application of
the Black-Scholes method to measure compensation expense as
required under SFAS No. 123.
Page 40 of 65
The following table details the disclosure required by
SFAS No. 123 (in thousands, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net income (loss) as reported
|
|
$
|
52,426
|
|
|
$
|
(13,496
|
)
|
Add: Stock-based employee
compensation expense included in reported net income, net of
related tax effects
|
|
|
1,734
|
|
|
|
605
|
|
Deduct: Total stock based employee
compensation expense determined under fair value based method
for all awards, net of related tax effects
|
|
|
(8,033
|
)
|
|
|
(12,640
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
46,127
|
|
|
$
|
(25,531
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic net income (loss) per share,
as reported
|
|
$
|
0.61
|
|
|
$
|
(0.16
|
)
|
Pro forma basic net income (loss)
per share
|
|
|
0.54
|
|
|
|
(0.30
|
)
|
Diluted net income (loss) per
share, as reported
|
|
$
|
0.60
|
|
|
$
|
(0.16
|
)
|
Pro forma diluted net income
(loss) per share
|
|
|
0.53
|
|
|
|
(0.30
|
)
|
We account for income taxes in accordance with
SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income
Taxes, which provides for the recognition of deferred
tax assets if realization of such assets is more likely than
not. We have provided a valuation allowance against a
substantial portion of our net U.S. deferred tax assets due
to uncertainties regarding their realization. We evaluate the
realizability of our deferred tax assets on a quarterly basis.
|
|
|
Net
Income (Loss) Per Share
|
Basic net income (loss) per share is based on the weighted
effect of common shares issued and outstanding and is calculated
by dividing net income (loss) by the basic weighted average
shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net income (loss)
per share is calculated by dividing net income (loss) by the
weighted average number of common shares used in the basic net
income (loss) per share calculation, plus the equivalent number
of common shares that would be issued assuming exercise or
conversion of all potentially dilutive common shares outstanding.
Incremental weighted average common shares attributable to the
assumed exercise of outstanding options of 1,510,000 shares
for the year ended March 26, 2005 were excluded from the
computation of diluted net income (loss) per share because the
effect would be anti-dilutive due to our loss position during
that year. The weighted outstanding options excluded from our
diluted calculation for the years ended March 31, 2007,
March 25, 2006, and March 26, 2005 were 5,975,000,
6,620,000, and 7,501,000, respectively, as the exercise price
exceeded the average market price during the period.
|
|
|
Accumulated
Other Comprehensive Loss
|
We report our accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
based upon Statement of Financial Accounting Standard
No. 130, Reporting Comprehensive Income.
Our accumulated other comprehensive loss is comprised of foreign
currency translation adjustments from prior years when we had
subsidiaries whose functional currency was not the
U.S. Dollar as well as unrealized gains and losses on
investments classified as
available-for-sale.
|
|
|
Recently
Issued Accounting Pronouncements
|
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159,
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and
Financial Liabilities (SFAS 159),
which allows entities to measure eligible financial instruments
and certain other items at fair value. The Statement also
establishes presentation and disclosure requirements designed to
facilitate comparisons between companies that choose different
measurement attributes for similar types of assets and
liabilities. SFAS 159 is effective for fiscal years
beginning after November 15, 2007. The Company is currently
assessing the potential effect, if any, of implementing this
standard.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements
(SFAS 157), which defines fair value,
establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands
disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS 157 is
effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15,
2007, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company
is currently assessing the potential effect, if any, of
implementing this standard.
In June 2006, the FASB issued Interpretation No. 48,
Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes
(FIN 48). FIN 48 clarifies the
application of SFAS No. 109 by providing detailed
guidance for the financial statement recognition, measurement
and disclosure of uncertain tax positions recognized in an
enterprises financial statements. Tax positions
Page 41 of 65
must meet a more-likely-than-not recognition threshold at the
effective date to be recognized upon the adoption of FIN 48
and in subsequent periods. We adopted FIN 48 as of
April 1, 2007, the first day of our 2008 fiscal year. The
Company is currently evaluating the potential effects, if any,
of FIN 48 on the consolidated financial statements.
|
|
|
Fair
Value of Financial Instruments
|
The Companys financial instruments consist principally of
cash and cash equivalents, investments, receivables and accounts
payable. The Company believes all of these financial instruments
are recorded at amounts that approximate their current market
values due to their short-term nature or because they are stated
at fair value.
The Companys investments that have original maturities
greater than ninety days have been classified as
available-for-sale
securities in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting
Standards No. 115 (SFAS 115),
Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity
Securities. Marketable securities are categorized on
the Balance Sheet as Restricted investments, Marketable
securities and Long-term marketable securities, as appropriate.
The following table is a summary of
available-for-sale
securities (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Gross Unrealized
|
|
|
Gross Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated Fair Value
|
|
As of March 31,
2007:
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
(Net Carrying Amount)
|
|
|
Corporate securities
U.S.
|
|
$
|
63,221
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
(27
|
)
|
|
$
|
63,200
|
|
Corporate securities
non U.S.
|
|
|
5,457
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,459
|
|
U.S. Government securities
|
|
|
67,047
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
67,057
|
|
Agency discount notes
|
|
|
38,080
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
|
|
38,075
|
|
Commercial paper
|
|
|
9,963
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,964
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt securities
|
|
|
183,768
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
(44
|
)
|
|
|
183,755
|
|
Marketable equity securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
183,768
|
|
|
$
|
31
|
|
|
$
|
(44
|
)
|
|
$
|
183,755
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Gross Unrealized
|
|
|
Gross Unrealized
|
|
|
Estimated Fair Value
|
|
As of March 25,
2006:
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Losses
|
|
|
(Net Carrying Amount)
|
|
|
Corporate securities
U.S.
|
|
$
|
40,096
|
|
|
$
|
5
|
|
|
$
|
(104
|
)
|
|
$
|
39,997
|
|
Corporate securities
non U.S.
|
|
|
1,676
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,676
|
|
U.S. Government securities
|
|
|
85,141
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(218
|
)
|
|
|
84,923
|
|
Agency discount notes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial paper
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt securities
|
|
|
126,913
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
(322
|
)
|
|
|
126,596
|
|
Marketable equity securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
126,913
|
|
|
$
|
202
|
|
|
$
|
(322
|
)
|
|
$
|
126,793
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The cost and estimated fair value of
available-for-sale
investments by contractual maturity were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2007
|
|
|
March 25, 2006
|
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
Amortized
|
|
|
Estimated
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
|
Within 1 year
|
|
$
|
183,768
|
|
|
$
|
183,755
|
|
|
$
|
108,156
|
|
|
$
|
107,893
|
|
After 1 year through
2 years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,757
|
|
|
|
18,703
|
|
After 2 years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total debt securities
|
|
|
183,768
|
|
|
|
183,755
|
|
|
|
126,913
|
|
|
|
126,596
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
183,768
|
|
|
$
|
183,755
|
|
|
$
|
126,913
|
|
|
$
|
126,793
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the first quarter of fiscal year 2007, we sold all of our
shares in Prudential Financial Inc. (Prudential) and
realized a gain of $0.2 million. Cirrus received these
shares as a result of the demutualization of Prudential.
Page 42 of 65
In the first quarter of fiscal year 2006, we recognized a gain
of $0.4 million related to the sale of an investment in
Silicon Laboratories, Inc. (Silicon Labs). Total
proceeds from the sale were also $0.4 million. These shares
were received as a result of a prior merger agreement whereby
Silicon Labs acquired Cygnal Integrated Products, Inc.
(Cygnal). This merger agreement stated that all
shareholders in Cygnal, Cirrus Logic included, would receive
shares of stock in Silicon Labs in exchange for their shares in
Cygnal. Further, the agreement stated that, should Cygnal
achieve certain revenue milestones, the former Cygnal
shareholders would receive a designated amount of stock in
Silicon Labs. Cygnal surpassed certain of those milestones laid
out in the merger agreement and, as a result, Silicon Labs
distributed certain shares of its stock held in escrow to Cirrus
Logic in the first quarter of fiscal year 2006. Cirrus Logic
sold these shares immediately upon receipt. Cirrus also recorded
$0.2 million in unrealized gains late during the fourth
quarter of fiscal year 2006 on the initial recognition of stock
held in Prudential that we received as a result of the
demutualization described above. The entire amount was recorded
as a component of other comprehensive income.
During fiscal year 2005, we recognized a gain of
$0.8 million related to sale of Silicon Labs stock
associated with the Cygnal transaction described above. In the
first quarter of fiscal year 2005, we recognized a gain of
$0.7 million on the sale of all of the Companys stock
in Silicon Labs that was received as part of the original merger
agreement between Cygnal and Silicon Labs. Total proceeds from
the sale were $1.2 million. In the fourth quarter of fiscal
year 2005, Cirrus Logic received additional shares in Silicon
Labs as a result of the milestones discussed above. Cirrus Logic
sold these shares immediately and recognized a gain of
$0.1 million.
|
|
3.
|
Accounts
Receivable, net
|
The following are the components of accounts receivable (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Gross accounts receivable
|
|
$
|
19,232
|
|
|
$
|
21,133
|
|
Less: Allowance for doubtful
accounts
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
|
|
(196
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net
|
|
$
|
19,127
|
|
|
$
|
20,937
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes the changes in the allowance for
doubtful accounts (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 27, 2004
|
|
$
|
(696
|
)
|
Write-off of uncollectible
accounts, net of recoveries
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 26, 2005
|
|
$
|
(521
|
)
|
Write-off of uncollectible
accounts, net of recoveries
|
|
|
(70
|
)
|
Change in allowance for doubtful
account estimate
|
|
|
395
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 25, 2006
|
|
$
|
(196
|
)
|
Write-off of uncollectible
accounts, net of recoveries
|
|
|
91
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
(105
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006, as a result of
our change in our customer base, we modified our estimate for
the distributor portion of the reserve for our allowance for
doubtful accounts. In making this change in estimate, we
recognized a $0.4 million credit to bad debt expense, a
component of both income from operations and net income. The
effect of this change in estimate on earnings per share was
negligible.
We were successful in collecting a portion of the Fujitsu
receivable previously written off in fiscal year 2002 in the
amount of $46.8 million. In fiscal year 2006, we recorded a
net credit to operating expenses of $24.8 million as our
litigation settlement was a recovery of bad debt previously
recorded in a prior fiscal year. See Note 8 for further
discussion of the litigation with Fujitsu.
|
|
4.
|
Non-Marketable
Securities
|
On April 25, 2005, we announced our intentions to divest
our digital video product line. On May 24, 2005, we signed
a definitive agreement to sell our digital video product line to
Magnum Semiconductor, Inc. (Magnum), a privately
held company formed by an investment group led by Investcorp and
August Capital. On June 30, 2005, we completed the sale of
our digital video product line assets to Magnum. As
consideration for the sale of these assets, we received a
minority ownership position in Magnum which, at the time of
sale, had a fair value of approximately $7.9 million. As
Magnum is not publicly traded and as Cirrus does not have
significant influence with Magnum, we have accounted for this
investment at cost.
Page 43 of 65
During the fourth quarter of fiscal 2007, we determined an
impairment indicator existed related to our cost method
investment in Magnum. We obtained an independent valuation of
the fair value of our cost method investment in Magnum in
accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force
No. 03-1
(EITF
03-1),
The Meaning of
Other-Than-Temporary
Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments.
Based on the results of the independent valuation, at
March 31, 2007, we recognized an impairment of
$4.3 million to reduce the carrying value of the Magnum
cost method investment to $3.6 million, as the combination
of recurrent losses and reduced forecasts indicate that our
investment is not recoverable within a reasonable period of
time. The impairment was recorded as a separate line item on the
statement of operations in operating expenses under the caption
Impairment of non-marketable securities.
During the second fiscal quarter of fiscal year 2006, we
recognized a net gain on the sale of assets to Magnum of
approximately $0.8 million, which was recorded as a
component of Restructuring and other, net.
Included in the net gain was a contingent payment to the
employees of Magnum of $0.5 million related to the closing
conditions of the agreement. Also, during the second quarter of
fiscal year 2006, after the completion of the digital video
product line asset sale to Magnum, we sold the remaining digital
video product inventory to Magnum for $1.9 million, which
was approximately 5 percent above our cost. As of
December 24, 2005, Magnum had paid for all of the shipped
inventory.
On December 29, 2006, Cirrus Logic acquired
100 percent of the voting equity interests in Caretta, a
company based in Shanghai, China that specializes in designing
power management integrated circuits for the large, single-cell
lithium ion battery market. This acquisition was undertaken to
strengthen and diversify our analog and mixed signal product
portfolios as well as position us for growth within the China
market.
The aggregate purchase price of $11.3 million,
$10.7 million net of cash acquired, was comprised of the
following components (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid to shareholders
|
|
|
9,000
|
|
Loan repayment premium
|
|
|
500
|
|
Direct acquisition
costs & other
|
|
|
1,762
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase price
|
|
$
|
11,262
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 30, 2006, the purchase price was allocated
to the estimated fair value of assets acquired based on
independent appraisals and management estimates in the following
manner (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Net liabilities assumed
|
|
|
(1,179
|
)
|
Intangible assets subject to
amortization
|
|
|
4,055
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
6,461
|
|
In process research and development
|
|
|
1,925
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net assets acquired
|
|
$
|
11,262
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The in-process research and development of $1.9 million was
immediately expensed upon completion of the acquisition while
the $4.1 million in acquired technology and the
$6.5 million in goodwill were capitalized. The above
categorization of the purchase price represents an estimate as
of March 31, 2007 and is subject to change. The acquired
technology will be amortized over a period of 10 years. The
goodwill will not be deductible for tax purposes. Carettas
results of operations were included in our own as of
December 29, 2006. Revenues from Caretta products are
currently being included in the Industrial product line.
Page 44 of 65
The following unaudited pro forma information presents the
combined results of operations of the Company and Caretta for
fiscal years 2007 and 2006 as if the acquisition had taken place
at the beginning of the respective fiscal years. The pro forma
numbers below include in-process research and development of
$1.9 million expensed at the time of the acquisition. The
information is provided for illustrative purposes only and is
not necessarily indicative of the consolidated results of
operations that actually would have occurred if the acquisition
had taken place at the beginning of the respective fiscal years,
nor is it necessarily indicative of the future operating results
of the Company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2007
|
|
March 25, 2006
|
|
Net revenues
|
|
$
|
183,388
|
|
|
$
|
193,694
|
|
Income before extraordinary items
and accounting change
|
|
|
26,819
|
|
|
|
51,417
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
26,819
|
|
|
|
51,417
|
|
Basic income per share
|
|
$
|
0.31
|
|
|
$
|
0.60
|
|
Diluted income per share
|
|
|
0.30
|
|
|
|
0.59
|
|
The following information details the gross carrying amount and
accumulated amortization of our intangible assets (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2007
|
|
March 25, 2006
|
|
|
Gross
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
Gross
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Amortization
|
|
Amount
|
|
Amortization
|
|
Core technology
|
|
$
|
5,493
|
|
|
$
|
(1,012
|
)
|
|
$
|
1,390
|
|
|
$
|
(759
|
)
|
Existing technology
|
|
|
2,730
|
|
|
|
(2,730
|
)
|
|
|
2,730
|
|
|
|
(2,686
|
)
|
License agreements
|
|
|
440
|
|
|
|
(289
|
)
|
|
|
440
|
|
|
|
(240
|
)
|
Technology licenses
|
|
|
12,400
|
|
|
|
(8,482
|
)
|
|
|
11,622
|
|
|
|
(9,531
|
)
|
Trademarks
|
|
|
320
|
|
|
|
(320
|
)
|
|
|
320
|
|
|
|
(320
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
21,383
|
|
|
$
|
(12,833
|
)
|
|
$
|
16,502
|
|
|
$
|
(13,536
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization expense for all intangibles in fiscal years 2007,
2006, and 2005 was $1.8 million, $3.5 million, and
$17.1 million, respectively.
The following table details the estimated aggregate amortization
expense for all intangibles owned as of March 31, 2007 for
each of the five succeeding fiscal years (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
For the year ended March 29,
2008
|
|
$
|
2,506
|
|
For the year ended March 28,
2009
|
|
$
|
1,727
|
|
For the year ended March 27,
2010
|
|
$
|
1,203
|
|
For the year ended March 26,
2011
|
|
$
|
479
|
|
For the year ended March 30,
2012
|
|
$
|
460
|
|
|
|
7.
|
Commitments
and Contingencies
|
Facilities
and Equipment Under Operating Lease Agreements
We lease our facilities and certain equipment under operating
lease agreements, some of which have renewal options. Certain of
these arrangements provide for lease payment increases based
upon future fair market rates. Our principal facilities, located
in Austin, Texas, consists of approximately 214,000 square
feet of leased space, which have leases that expire from fiscal
year 2007 to fiscal year 2013, excluding renewal options. It
includes our headquarters and engineering facility, which has
197,000 square feet and no escalating rent clauses.
Page 45 of 65
The aggregate minimum future rental commitments under all
operating leases for the following fiscal years are
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Facilities
|
|
|
Equipment
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Facilities
|
|
|
Subleases
|
|
|
Commitments
|
|
|
Commitments
|
|
|
Commitments
|
|
|
2008
|
|
$
|
9,565
|
|
|
$
|
3,471
|
|
|
$
|
6,094
|
|
|
$
|
13
|
|
|
$
|
6,107
|
|
2009
|
|
|
8,621
|
|
|
|
2,984
|
|
|
|
5,637
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
5,644
|
|
2010
|
|
|
4,993
|
|
|
|
918
|
|
|
|
4,075
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
4,081
|
|
2011
|
|
|
4,651
|
|
|
|
763
|
|
|
|
3,888
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
3,890
|
|
2012
|
|
|
4,633
|
|
|
|
788
|
|
|
|
3,845
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,845
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
1,930
|
|
|
|
331
|
|
|
|
1,599
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,599
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total minimum lease payments
|
|
$
|
34,393
|
|
|
$
|
9,255
|
|
|
$
|
25,138
|
|
|
$
|
28
|
|
|
$
|
25,166
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total rent expense was approximately $8.5 million,
$8.6 million, and $11.5 million, for fiscal years
2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively. Sublease rental income was
$4.0 million, $4.6 million, and $5.8 million, for
fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005, respectively.
During fiscal year 2007, we recorded approximately
$1.0 million and $0.7 million in charges to operating
expense to adjust our loss contingency accruals for a change in
sublease assumptions with regards to our facilities in Austin,
Texas and Fremont, California, respectively. We also
transitioned our design activities at our Boulder, Colorado
design facility to our headquarters in Austin, Texas. This
design facility is approximately 12,000 square feet in size
and has a lease which expires in fiscal year 2011 however, there
is an early termination option provided to us in the lease. If
we choose to exercise that option, we will be released from our
obligations under the lease in fiscal year 2009. The cost of
exercising this option is immaterial. This transition is
discussed in greater detail in Note 10,
Restructuring and Other Costs.
Further, we recorded a charge to operating expense during fiscal
year 2006 in the amount of $4.4 million for certain
subleases at our Austin, Texas facility that did not fully cover
the monthly rent owed to our landlord. As of March 31,
2007, a total of $5.2 million related to these vacated
leases remained accrued. Where appropriate, these amounts are
classified as either long-term or short-term. These amounts are
included in the table above; the $5.6 million in facilities
restructuring accruals that existed for these leases as of
March 31, 2007 are discussed in greater detail in
Note 10, Restructuring and Other Costs.
Wafer,
Assembly and Test Purchase Commitments
We rely on third-party foundries for our wafer manufacturing
needs. As of March 31, 2007, we had agreements with
multiple foundries for the manufacture of wafers. None of these
foundry agreements have volume purchase commitments or
take or pay clauses. The agreements provide for
purchase commitments based on purchase orders. Cancellation fees
or other charges may apply and are generally dependent upon
whether wafers have been started or the stage of the
manufacturing process at which the notice of cancellation is
given. As of March 31, 2007, we had foundry commitments of
$4.1 million.
In addition to our wafer supply arrangements, we contract with
third-party assembly vendors to package the wafer die into
finished products. Assembly vendors provide fixed-cost-per-unit
pricing, as is common in the semiconductor industry. We had
non-cancelable assembly purchase orders with numerous vendors
totaling $0.2 million at March 31, 2007.
We have transitioned all of our test services to outside third
party contractors. Test vendors provide fixed-cost-per-unit
pricing, as is common in the semiconductor industry. Our total
non-cancelable commitment for outside test services as of
March 31, 2007 was $4.6 million. Included in the
$4.6 million are amounts associated with a manufacturing
services agreement between Cirrus and Premier Semiconductor, LLC
(Premier) dated March 25, 2005, pursuant to
which Cirrus has committed to purchase test services from
Premier totaling $3.1 million and $1.0 million in
fiscal years 2008 and 2009, respectively.
Other open purchase orders, including those for sorting and
serialization, were immaterial as of March 31, 2007.
Other
Contingencies
On June 3, 2003, the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore
(IRAS) notified us that it disagreed with our
classification of sales to certain disk drive customers from May
1997 through March 1998, resulting in additional goods and
services taxes (GST) owed by us. After a thorough
review of these matters by both the Company and representatives
from IRAS, we reached an agreement in the third quarter of 2005
on this and all other audit issues covering years 1997 through
2000. As a result, instead of incurring a liability, the Company
received $2.3 million for
Page 46 of 65
reclaimed GST collected by vendors during the years 1997 through
2000. This amount was reported as a reduction of our selling,
general and administrative expenses during fiscal year 2005.
Derivative
Lawsuits
On January 5, 2007, a purported stockholder filed a
derivative lawsuit in state district court in Travis County,
Texas against current and former officers and directors of
Cirrus Logic and against the Company, as a nominal defendant,
alleging various breaches of fiduciary duties, conspiracy,
improper financial reporting, insider trading, violations of the
Texas Securities Act, unjust enrichment, accounting, gross
mismanagement, abuse of control, rescission, and waste of
corporate assets related to certain prior grants of stock
options by the Company. Our response to the lawsuit was filed on
April 20, 2007.
On March 19, 2007, another purported stockholder filed a
derivative lawsuit related to the Companys prior stock
option grants in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas Austin Division against
current and former officers and directors of Cirrus Logic and
against the Company, as a nominal defendant. The individual
defendants named in this lawsuit overlap, but not completely,
with the state suit. The lawsuit alleges many of the causes of
action alleged in the Texas state court suit, but also includes
claims for alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the
Exchange Act and
Rule 10b-5,
violations of Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and
violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act. On
April 10, 2007, we filed a motion to dismiss the complaint
on the grounds that the plaintiff was supposed to make demands
on the Board before filing the lawsuit. The plaintiff has not
filed a response and no hearing before the court is currently
set on the motion to dismiss.
On March 30, 2007, a different purported stockholder filed
a nearly identical derivative lawsuit to the March 19, 2007
derivative lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas Austin Division with
identical allegations against the same defendants.
On May 22, 2007, a fourth derivative lawsuit related to the
Companys prior stock option grants was filed. This lawsuit
was also filed in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Texas-Austin Division and contained similar
allegations to the other previously filed derivative lawsuits.
Fujitsu
On October 19, 2001, we filed a lawsuit against Fujitsu,
Ltd. (Fujitsu) in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California. We asserted claims for
breach of contract and anticipatory breach of contract and we
sought damages in excess of $46 million. The basis for our
complaint was Fujitsus refusal to pay for hard disk
drive-related chips delivered to and accepted by it in fiscal
year 2002. On December 17, 2001, Fujitsu filed an answer
and a counterclaim. Fujitsu alleged claims for breach of
contract, breach of warranty, quantum meruit/equitable indemnity
and declaratory relief. The basis for Fujitsus
counterclaim was the allegation that certain chips that we sold
to Fujitsu were defective and allegedly caused Fujitsus
hard disk drives to fail.
On December 5, 2003, for reasons related to the potential
lack of jurisdiction for certain claims in federal district
court, Fujitsu filed a complaint in California state court
alleging claims substantially similar to those filed against us
in district court and, in addition, alleging fraud and other
related claims against Amkor and Sumitomo. On December 23,
2003, we filed a cross-complaint in California state court
alleging the same claims against Fujitsu as we alleged in
federal district court and further alleging fraud and other
related claims against Amkor and Sumitomo based on their alleged
knowledge that the molding compound used in the packaging
materials sold to us was defective.
On April 28, 2005, before the rescheduled trial date,
Cirrus Logic, Fujitsu, Amkor, Sumitomo, and Cirrus Logics
insurance carriers reached an agreement through an arbitration
process to settle and release all pending claims related to the
alleged failure of certain semiconductor ICs sold by Cirrus
Logic to Fujitsu. These releases included releases between our
insurance carriers and us for any claims related to the
litigation with Fujitsu. As part of the settlement, Fujitsu
received $45 million from Sumitomo, $40 million from
Amkor, and $40 million from Cirrus Logics insurance
carriers. Fujitsu paid us a lump sum in the amount of
$25 million. The final settlement documents were completed
on June 10, 2005, and payment was received on June 16,
2005. Part of the $25 million received from the settlement
represented a recovery of bad debt expense recorded in fiscal
year 2002 of approximately $46.8 million. The
$25 million received was partially offset by approximately
$0.2 million in outside fees associated with this
transaction. The net amount was recorded as a separate line item
as a component of operating expenses during the first quarter of
fiscal year 2006.
Page 47 of 65
St.
Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company
On June 9, 2004, we filed a complaint for declaratory
relief against St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Co.
(St. Paul) in the United States District Court,
Northern District of California. Specifically, the complaint
seeks a judicial determination and declaration that the
Technology Commercial General Liability
Protection (CGL) coverage under an insurance
policy issued to us by St. Paul provides Cirrus Logic with
insurance coverage for Cirrus Logics defense of claims
brought by Fujitsu in the previously referenced matter. Pursuant
to our CGL policy, the costs and expenses associated with
defending our lawsuit against Fujitsu would be covered, but
would not reduce the policy coverage limits. On August 23,
2004, St. Paul answered the complaint, denying that it was
obligated to defend us under the CGL policy.
Based on the settlement and releases agreed to by the insurance
carriers as set forth in the Fujitsu matter, we believe this
matter has been resolved between Cirrus Logic and St. Paul. On
August 2, 2005, the district court dismissed the case
without prejudice.
Silvaco
Data Systems
On December 8, 2004, Silvaco Data Systems
(Silvaco) filed suit against us, and others,
alleging misappropriation of trade secrets, conversion, unfair
business practices, and civil conspiracy. Silvacos
complaint stems from a trade secret dispute between Silvaco and
a software vendor, Circuit Semantics, Inc., who supplies us with
certain software design tools. Silvaco alleges that our use of
Circuit Semantics design tools infringes upon
Silvacos trade secrets and that we are liable for
compensatory damages in the sum of $10 million. Silvaco has
not indicated how it will substantiate this amount of damages
and we are unable to reasonably estimate the amount of damages,
if any.
On January 25, 2005, we answered Silvacos complaint
by denying any wrong-doing. In addition, we filed a
cross-complaint against Silvaco alleging breach of contract
relating to Silvacos refusal to provide certain technology
that would enable us to use certain unrelated software tools.
We intend to defend the lawsuit vigorously. In addition, Circuit
Semantics is obligated to defend and indemnify us pursuant to
our license agreement with them for the software. However, we
cannot predict the ultimate outcome of this litigation and we
are unable to estimate any potential liability we may incur.
Facilities
Under Operating Lease Agreements
We lease our facilities under operating lease agreements. Our
principal facility, located in Austin, Texas, is
197,000 square feet and houses our headquarters and
engineering facility. As originally drafted, the lease agreement
for this facility included a potential obligation to enter into
another lease agreement for a period of 10 years for an
additional 64,000 square feet in a new building to be built
on property next to our current facility. This obligation was
contingent upon construction beginning on the new facility
before November 10, 2004. On September 14, 2004, our
landlord provided us notice that it had elected to construct the
new building.
On November 12, 2004, we filed suit against our landlord in
the state district court of Travis County, Texas seeking
declaratory relief as to our obligations under the current
operating lease agreement. Specifically, we sought a declaration
that we had no obligation to lease an additional two floors of
space because the landlord did not commence construction of the
new facility before November 10, 2004.
On November 30, 2005, we entered into a Settlement
Agreement and Release with our landlord for the purpose of
settling all claims associated with the suit. The settlement
provided mutual releases associated with any obligations by
either party with respect to leasing additional space in a new
building. As part of the settlement, we paid our landlord
$150,000 and agreed to amend the current lease such that we are
now bound to maintain our Letter of Credit in the amount of
$5.1 million until November 2011, at which point the
requirement decreases to $2.6 million with the Letter of
Credit ceasing in May 2012. This modifies the original letter of
credit in that the new letter of credit does not decline until
November 2011. All claims and counterclaims in the suit were
dismissed on December 13, 2005.
Other
Claims
From time to time, other various claims, charges and litigation
are asserted or commenced against us arising from, or related
to, contractual matters, intellectual property, employment
disputes, as well as other issues. Frequent claims and
litigation involving these types of issues are not uncommon in
the IC industry. As to any of these claims or litigation, we
cannot predict the ultimate outcome with certainty.
Page 48 of 65
|
|
9.
|
License
Agreement Amendment
|
During the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006, we realized a
gain of $7 million resulting from a one-time cash receipt
associated with an amendment to an existing licensing agreement,
in which certain rights to Cirrus Logic were terminated from a
prior cross-license agreement. The proceeds were recorded as a
separate line item on the statement of operations in operating
expenses under the heading License agreement
amendment.
|
|
10.
|
Restructuring
Costs and Other
|
During fiscal year 2007, we recorded restructuring charges of
$1.0 million to operating expenses primarily related to the
transition of design activities from our Boulder, Colorado
office to our headquarters in Austin, Texas. The restructuring
costs for the closure of the Boulder design center were composed
of $0.7 million in severance and relocation costs and
$0.3 million in facility related charges. Approximately
twenty employees were affected by this action, five of which
were relocated to our Austin headquarters.
The following table sets forth the activity in our fiscal year
2007 restructuring accrual (in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
|
Abandonment
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Balance, March 25, 2006
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Fiscal year 2007 provision
|
|
|
716
|
|
|
|
278
|
|
|
|
994
|
|
Cash payments, net
|
|
|
(521
|
)
|
|
|
(74
|
)
|
|
|
(595
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
195
|
|
|
$
|
204
|
|
|
$
|
399
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During fiscal year 2007, we accrued an additional
$0.1 million for severance activities. With respect to our
facilities abandonment accruals, we increased our restructuring
accrual by $0.3 and $0.1 million to account for additional
property taxes and other facilities costs, respectively, on
certain facilities in Fremont, California. During fiscal year
2006, we recorded a total net restructuring charge of
$3.1 million in operating expenses for severance and
facility related items primarily associated with workforce
reductions related to the sale of the digital video product line
assets and our revised sublease assumption for a previously
exited facility. This action affected approximately 10
individuals worldwide and resulted in a net charge of
approximately $0.4 million. In connection with the digital
video product line asset sale, we ceased using certain leased
office space in our Fremont, California location. Accordingly,
we recorded a restructuring charge of $1.1 million related
to the exit from this facility. Partially offsetting the
restructuring charge was $0.8 million related to the gain
on the digital video product line asset sale. For further
detail, see Note 4, Non Marketable
Securities.
The following table sets forth the activity in our fiscal year
2006 restructuring accrual (in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
|
Abandonment
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Balance, March 26, 2005
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Fiscal year 2006 provision
|
|
|
412
|
|
|
|
2,299
|
|
|
|
2,711
|
|
Cash payments, net
|
|
|
(412
|
)
|
|
|
(353
|
)
|
|
|
(765
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 25, 2006
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,946
|
|
|
$
|
1,946
|
|
Fiscal year 2007 provision
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
|
292
|
|
|
|
378
|
|
Cash payments, net
|
|
|
(86
|
)
|
|
|
(511
|
)
|
|
|
(597
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,727
|
|
|
$
|
1,727
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal year 2007 activity included a $0.8 million credit to
restructuring for the acquisition of a subtenant at our
headquarters in Austin, Texas earlier than we had previously
expected. This credit was partially offset by the accrual of
$0.5 million in additional property taxes on certain
facilities in Austin, Texas and Fremont, California. During
fiscal year 2006, due to the continued depressed real estate
market, we recorded an additional charge of $1.8 million
for certain leases in California related to our fiscal year 2004
restructuring activity, due to a change in our sublease
assumptions. During fiscal year 2005, we re-assessed our
sublease assumptions related to our restructured facilities and
determined that an additional $0.2 million was required due
to our inability to sublease certain facilities. During fiscal
year 2004, we recorded a charge of $1.7 million in
operating expenses primarily related to severance for headcount
reductions. We eliminated approximately 130 positions from
various job classes and functions during fiscal year 2004, with
the majority of the reductions in Austin, Texas, primarily in
selling, general and administrative functions and in our
Colorado operations, primarily in engineering. Included in this
reduction was the elimination of 64 of approximately 120 test
operation positions and a total severance charge of
approximately $0.4 million as part of our previously
announced plan to
Page 49 of 65
reduce headcount associated with our outsourcing agreement with
ChipPAC. Also during fiscal year 2004, we recorded a
restructuring charge of $6.2 million in operating expenses
for facility consolidations primarily in California and Texas,
an impairment charge of $1.5 million for property and
equipment associated with our Austin, Texas facility
consolidation and an impairment charge of $0.2 million for
property and equipment associated with our Tokyo, Japan facility
consolidation. Our facility commitments for the fiscal year 2004
actions will be completed during fiscal year 2013.
The following table sets forth the activity in our fiscal year
2004 restructuring accrual (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Facilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Severance
|
|
|
Abandonment
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Balance, March 29, 2003
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Fiscal year 2004 provision
|
|
|
1,688
|
|
|
|
6,205
|
|
|
|
7,893
|
|
Cash payments, net
|
|
|
(1,514
|
)
|
|
|
(908
|
)
|
|
|
(2,422
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 27, 2004
|
|
$
|
174
|
|
|
$
|
5,297
|
|
|
$
|
5,471
|
|
Fiscal year 2005 provision
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
178
|
|
|
|
178
|
|
Cash payments, net
|
|
|
(174
|
)
|
|
|
(944
|
)
|
|
|
(1,118
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 26, 2005
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,531
|
|
|
$
|
4,531
|
|
Fiscal year 2006 provision
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
627
|
|
|
|
627
|
|
Cash payments, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(954
|
)
|
|
|
(954
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 25, 2006
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
4,204
|
|
|
$
|
4,204
|
|
Fiscal year 2007 provision
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
214
|
|
|
|
214
|
|
Cash payments, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,124
|
)
|
|
|
(1,124
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,294
|
|
|
$
|
3,294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The remaining balance for the fiscal year 1999 restructuring
relates to a contractual obligation of $0.4 million with a
tenant to whom we have subleased space that expired in fiscal
year 2007.
As of March 31, 2007, we have a remaining restructuring
accrual for all of our past restructurings of $5.8 million,
primarily related to net lease expenses that will be paid over
the respective lease terms through fiscal year 2013, along with
other anticipated lease termination costs. We have classified
the short-term portion of our restructuring activities as
Other accrued liabilities.
|
|
11.
|
Employee
Benefit Plans
|
We have a 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan (the Plan)
covering substantially all of our qualifying domestic employees.
Under the Plan, employees may elect to contribute any percentage
of their annual compensation up to the annual IRS limitations.
We match 50 percent of the first 6 percent of the
employees annual contribution to the plan. During fiscal
years 2007, 2006, and 2005, we made matching employee
contributions for a total of approximately $0.8 million,
$0.8 million, and $0.9 million, respectively.
Employee
Stock Purchase Plan
In March 1989, we adopted the 1989 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
(ESPP). As of March 31, 2007, 0.9 million
shares of common stock were reserved for future issuance under
this plan. During fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005, we issued
48,000, 339,000, and 422,000 shares, respectively, under
the ESPP. In fiscal year 2006, the Board of Directors of the
Company approved amendments to the ESPP eliminating the
six-month look back feature of the plan and reducing the
purchase price discount from 15 percent to 5 percent.
These modifications became effective for all ESPP options
granted during fiscal year 2007. Based on these modifications,
the plan is no longer compensatory and the company does not
recognize any compensation expense associated with the ESPP
grants. The weighted average estimated fair values for purchase
rights granted under the ESPP for fiscal years 2006 and 2005
were $1.57 and $2.25, respectively.
Preferred
Stock
On May 24, 2005, the Board of Directors of the Company
approved an amendment (the Amendment) to the Amended
and Restated Rights Agreement, dated as of February 17,
1999, between the Company and BankBoston, N.A., as Rights Agent.
The Amendment accelerates the termination of the Companys
preferred stock purchase rights (the
Page 50 of 65
Rights) from the close of business on May 4,
2008 to the close of business on May 26, 2005. On
May 25, 2005, the Chief Financial Officer (CFO)
signed a Certificate of Elimination that was subsequently filed
with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware which had
the effect of eliminating from the Companys Certificate of
Incorporation all references to the Series A Participating
Preferred Stock of the Company and returning these shares to the
status of undesignated shares of authorized Preferred Stock of
the Company. We have not issued any of the authorized
1.5 million shares of Series A Participating Preferred
Stock.
Stock
Incentive Plans
Effective March 26, 2006, the beginning of our fiscal year
2007, the Company adopted the provisions of the Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R)
(SFAS No. 123(R)) and, in doing
so, consulted the guidance provided in Staff Accounting
Bulletin No. 107
(SAB No. 107).
SFAS No. 123(R) requires stock-based compensation to
be accounted for under the fair value method and requires the
use of an option pricing model for estimating fair value.
Accordingly, stock-based compensation is measured at grant date
based on the fair value of the award. The Company previously
accounted for awards granted under its equity incentive plans
under the intrinsic value method prescribed by Accounting
Principles Board Opinion No. 25 (APB
No. 25), Accounting for Stock Issued to
Employees, and related interpretations, and provided
the required pro forma disclosures prescribed by
SFAS No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based
Compensation, as amended.
Under the modified prospective method of adoption for
SFAS No. 123(R), the compensation cost recognized by
the Company beginning in fiscal year 2007 includes
(a) compensation cost for all equity incentive awards
granted prior to, but not yet vested as of March 26, 2006,
based on the grant-date fair value estimated in accordance with
the original provisions of SFAS No. 123, and
(b) compensation cost for all equity incentive awards
granted subsequent to March 25, 2006, based on the
grant-date fair value estimated in accordance with the
provisions of SFAS No. 123(R). The Company uses the
accelerated method to recognize stock-based compensation costs
over the service period of the award. Upon exercise,
cancellation, or expiration of stock options, deferred tax
assets for options with multiple vesting dates are eliminated
for each vesting period on a
first-in,
first-out basis as if each tranche was a separate award.
We have stock incentive plans (the Stock Plans)
under which officers, employees, non-employee directors and
consultants may be granted qualified and non-qualified options
to purchase shares of our authorized but not issued common
stock. Our policies state that options are priced at the fair
market value of the stock on the date of grant. Options granted
to employees are exercisable upon vesting, generally in tranches
over four years and certain options granted to non-employee
directors are exercisable upon grant. Options expire no later
than ten years from the date of grant.
Stock-based compensation recognized in fiscal year 2007 as a
result of the adoption of SFAS No. 123(R), as well as
pro forma disclosures according to the original provisions of
SFAS No. 123 for periods prior to the adoption of
SFAS No. 123(R), use the Black-Scholes option pricing
model for estimating fair value of options granted under the
Companys equity incentive plans.
The following table summarizes the effects of stock-based
compensation on cost of goods sold, research and development,
sales, general and administrative, income from continuing
operations before taxes, and net income after taxes for options
granted under the Companys equity incentive plans (in
thousands, except per share amounts; unaudited):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
$
|
63
|
|
|
$
|
20
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
Research and development
|
|
|
2,050
|
|
|
|
685
|
|
|
|
539
|
|
Sales, general and administrative
|
|
|
3,243
|
|
|
|
1,029
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on income from continuing
operations (before taxes)
|
|
|
5,356
|
|
|
|
1,734
|
|
|
|
605
|
|
Income Tax Benefit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total share based compensation
expense (net of taxes)
|
|
$
|
5,356
|
|
|
$
|
1,734
|
|
|
$
|
605
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Share based compensation effects
on basic earnings (loss) per share
|
|
$
|
0.06
|
|
|
$
|
0.02
|
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
Share based compensation effects
on diluted earnings (loss) per share
|
|
$
|
0.06
|
|
|
$
|
0.02
|
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
Share based compensation effects
on operating activities cash flow
|
|
|
5,356
|
|
|
|
1,734
|
|
|
|
605
|
|
Share based compensation effects
on financing activities cash flow
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 51 of 65
During fiscal year 2007, we received a net $6.0 million
from the exercise of options granted under the Companys
Stock Plans.
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during fiscal
year 2007, 2006, and 2005 was $4.1 million,
$4.6 million, and $0.8 million, respectively.
Intrinsic value represents the difference between the market
value of Cirrus Logic common stock at the time of exercise and
the strike price of the option.
As of March 31, 2007, there was $5.5 million of
compensation cost related to non-vested stock option awards
granted under the Companys equity incentive plans not yet
recognized in the Companys financial statements. The
unrecognized compensation cost is expected to be recognized over
a weighted average period of 1.24 years.
As of March 31, 2007, approximately 25.7 million
shares of common stock were reserved for issuance under the
Option Plans. Additional information with respect to stock
option activity is as follows (in thousands, except per share
amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding Options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
Options Available
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
for Grant
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
|
Balance, March 27, 2004
|
|
|
13,130
|
|
|
|
11,037
|
|
|
$
|
9.83
|
|
Shares authorized for issuance
|
|
|
3,376
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options granted
|
|
|
(3,463
|
)
|
|
|
3,463
|
|
|
|
5.43
|
|
Options exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(390
|
)
|
|
|
3.34
|
|
Options forfeited
|
|
|
1,680
|
|
|
|
(1,680
|
)
|
|
|
9.89
|
|
Options expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(106
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 26, 2005
|
|
|
14,723
|
|
|
|
12,324
|
|
|
$
|
8.79
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares authorized for issuance
|
|
|
3,408
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options granted
|
|
|
(2,446
|
)
|
|
|
2,446
|
|
|
|
7.46
|
|
Options exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,270
|
)
|
|
|
3.75
|
|
Options forfeited
|
|
|
1,370
|
|
|
|
(1,370
|
)
|
|
|
9.76
|
|
Options expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(170
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 25, 2006
|
|
|
17,055
|
|
|
|
11,960
|
|
|
$
|
8.93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares authorized for issuance
|
|
|
20,473
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Option plans terminated
|
|
|
(22,463
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options granted
|
|
|
(421
|
)
|
|
|
421
|
|
|
|
7.52
|
|
Options exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,299
|
)
|
|
|
5.26
|
|
Options forfeited
|
|
|
2,062
|
|
|
|
(812
|
)
|
|
|
6.54
|
|
Options expired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,250
|
)
|
|
|
16.68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 31, 2007
|
|
|
16,706
|
|
|
|
9,020
|
|
|
$
|
8.54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 52 of 65
Additional information with regards to outstanding options that
are vesting, expected to vest, or exercisable as of
March 31, 2007 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
Options
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
Contractual
|
|
Intrinsic Value
|
|
|
(thousands)
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
Term (years)
|
|
(thousands)
|
|
Vested and expected to vest
|
|
|
8,240
|
|
|
$
|
8.72
|
|
|
|
4.95
|
|
|
$
|
9,837
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
|
6,510
|
|
|
$
|
9.23
|
|
|
|
4.08
|
|
|
$
|
8,098
|
|
The following table summarizes information regarding outstanding
and exercisable options as of March 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
Weighted
|
|
Number
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Remaining
|
|
Average Exercise
|
|
Exercisable
|
|
Average
|
Range of Exercise Prices
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
Contractual Life
|
|
Price
|
|
(in thousands)
|
|
Exercise Price
|
|
$ 0.19 - $ 2.60
|
|
|
212
|
|
|
|
5.89
|
|
|
$
|
2.38
|
|
|
|
212
|
|
|
$
|
2.38
|
|
$ 2.61 - $ 3.40
|
|
|
714
|
|
|
|
6.22
|
|
|
|
3.40
|
|
|
|
665
|
|
|
|
3.40
|
|
$ 3.41 - $ 5.16
|
|
|
1,673
|
|
|
|
7.42
|
|
|
|
4.92
|
|
|
|
1,007
|
|
|
|
4.88
|
|
$ 5.17 - $ 6.97
|
|
|
1,244
|
|
|
|
6.49
|
|
|
|
6.56
|
|
|
|
944
|
|
|
|
6.55
|
|
$ 6.98 - $ 9.00
|
|
|
2,880
|
|
|
|
6.86
|
|
|
|
7.64
|
|
|
|
1,455
|
|
|
|
7.69
|
|
$ 9.01 - $14.33
|
|
|
979
|
|
|
|
1.78
|
|
|
|
10.60
|
|
|
|
909
|
|
|
|
10.70
|
|
$14.34 - $16.69
|
|
|
780
|
|
|
|
4.06
|
|
|
|
16.00
|
|
|
|
780
|
|
|
|
16.00
|
|
$16.70 - $44.50
|
|
|
538
|
|
|
|
3.93
|
|
|
|
23.80
|
|
|
|
538
|
|
|
|
23.80
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,020
|
|
|
|
5.51
|
|
|
$
|
8.54
|
|
|
|
6,510
|
|
|
$
|
9.23
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 25, 2006 and March 26, 2005, the number of
options exercisable was 7.2 million and 6.9 million,
respectively.
In accordance with the provisions of SFAS No. 123(R),
options outstanding that are expected to vest are presented net
of estimated future option forfeitures, which are estimated as
compensation costs are recognized. Options with a fair value of
$4.8 million, $5.3 million and $4.6 million
became vested during fiscal years 2007, 2006 and 2005,
respectively.
Stock-Based
Compensation
If we had recorded compensation cost for all of our Stock
Incentive Plans based upon the Black-Scholes fair value at the
grant date for awards under the Option Plans consistent with the
optional methodology prescribed under Statement of
SFAS No. 123 the net income (loss) and earnings per
share would have been as shown below (in thousands, except per
share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
2006
|
|
2005
|
|
Net income (loss), as reported
|
|
$
|
52,426
|
|
|
$
|
(13,496
|
)
|
Pro forma net income (loss)
|
|
|
46,127
|
|
|
|
(25,531
|
)
|
Basic net income (loss) per share,
as reported
|
|
$
|
0.61
|
|
|
$
|
(0.16
|
)
|
Pro forma basic net income (loss)
per share
|
|
|
0.54
|
|
|
|
(0.30
|
)
|
Diluted net income (loss) per
share, as reported
|
|
|
0.60
|
|
|
|
(0.16
|
)
|
Pro forma diluted net income
(loss) per share
|
|
|
0.53
|
|
|
|
(0.30
|
)
|
For purposes of pro forma disclosures, the estimated fair value
of the options are amortized to expense over the vesting period
(for options) and the six-month purchase period (for stock
purchases under the ESPP) using the accelerated method.
Page 53 of 65
We estimated the fair value of each option grant on the date of
grant using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model using a
dividend yield of zero and the following additional
weighted-average assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Employee Option Plans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected stock price volatility
|
|
|
36.73-47.80
|
%
|
|
|
40.23-94.39
|
%
|
|
|
96.80
|
%
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
4.65-4.99
|
%
|
|
|
3.70-4.80
|
%
|
|
|
3.9
|
%
|
Expected lives (in years)
|
|
|
1.45-3.09
|
|
|
|
0.70-1.62
|
|
|
|
1.31
|
|
Employee Stock Purchase Plan:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected stock price volatility
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
40.23-50.00
|
%
|
|
|
50.00-96.80
|
%
|
Risk-free interest rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.38-4.80
|
%
|
|
|
1.66
|
%
|
Expected lives (in years)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00-0.50
|
|
|
|
0.50
|
|
Using the Black-Scholes option valuation model, the weighted
average estimated fair values of employee stock options granted
in fiscal years 2007, 2006, and 2005, were $2.97, $2.36, and
$3.60, respectively. The weighted average estimated fair values
for purchase rights granted under the ESPP for fiscal years 2006
and 2005 were $1.57 and $2.25, respectively.
Rights
Plan
In May 1998, the Board of Directors declared a dividend of one
preferred share purchase right (a Right) for each
share of common stock outstanding held as of May 15, 1998.
Each Right would have entitled stockholders to purchase one
one-hundredth of a share of our Series A Participating
Preferred Stock at an exercise price of $60. The Rights only
became exercisable in certain limited circumstances following
the tenth day after a person or group announces acquisitions of
or tender offers for 15 percent or more of our common
stock. For a limited period following the announcement of any
such acquisition or offer, the Rights were redeemable by us at a
price of $0.01 per Right. If the Rights were not redeemed,
each Right then entitled the holder to purchase common stock
having the value of twice the exercise price. For a limited
period after the Rights were exercisable, each Right, at the
discretion of the Board, could be exchanged for one share of
common stock per Right. The Rights were originally scheduled to
expire in fiscal year 2009.
On May 24, 2005, the Board of Directors of the Company
approved an amendment to the Amended and Restated Rights
Agreement, dated as of February 17, 1999, between the
Company and BankBoston, N.A., as Rights Agent. The Amendment
accelerates the termination of the Companys preferred
stock purchase rights from the close of business on May 4,
2008 to the close of business on May 26, 2005. On
May 25, 2005, the CFO signed a Certificate of Elimination
that was subsequently filed with the Secretary of State of the
State of Delaware which had the effect of eliminating from the
Companys Certificate of Incorporation all references to
the Series A Participating Preferred Stock of the Company
and returning these shares to the status of undesignated shares
of authorized Preferred Stock of the Company, thereby
terminating the Rights plan.
|
|
13.
|
Accumulated
Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
|
Our accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) is comprised
of foreign currency translation adjustments and unrealized gains
and losses on investments classified as
available-for-sale.
The foreign currency translation adjustments are not currently
adjusted for income taxes because they relate to indefinite
investments in
non-U.S. subsidiaries
that have since changed from a foreign functional currency to a
U.S dollar functional currency.
The following table summarizes the changes in the components of
accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
Gains (Losses)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
on Securities
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Balance, March 27, 2004
|
|
$
|
(770
|
)
|
|
$
|
599
|
|
|
$
|
(171
|
)
|
Current-period activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(982
|
)
|
|
|
(982
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 26, 2005
|
|
|
(770
|
)
|
|
|
(383
|
)
|
|
|
(1,153
|
)
|
Current-period activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
263
|
|
|
|
263
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 25, 2006
|
|
|
(770
|
)
|
|
|
(120
|
)
|
|
|
(890
|
)
|
Current-period activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
107
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, March 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
(770
|
)
|
|
$
|
(13
|
)
|
|
$
|
(783
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 54 of 65
Income (loss) before income taxes consisted of (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
21,226
|
|
|
$
|
45,230
|
|
|
$
|
(34,254
|
)
|
Non-U.S.
|
|
|
(1,733
|
)
|
|
|
161
|
|
|
|
(31
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
19,493
|
|
|
$
|
45,391
|
|
|
$
|
(34,285
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The benefit for income taxes consists of (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(15,247
|
)
|
State
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
Non-U.S.
|
|
|
(780
|
)
|
|
|
(6,695
|
)
|
|
|
(5,537
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Current Tax Benefit
|
|
$
|
(780
|
)
|
|
$
|
(6,695
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,789
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
$
|
(7,797
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Non-U.S.
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
|
(340
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Deferred Tax Benefit
|
|
|
(7,622
|
)
|
|
|
(340
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Tax Benefit
|
|
$
|
(8,402
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7,035
|
)
|
|
$
|
(20,789
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The provision (benefit) for income taxes differs from the amount
computed by applying the statutory federal rate to pretax income
(loss) as follows (in percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
March 26,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Expected income tax provision
(benefit) at the US federal statutory rate
|
|
|
35.0
|
|
|
|
35.0
|
|
|
|
(35.0
|
)
|
In-process research and development
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net operating loss and future
deductions not currently benefited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34.9
|
|
Release of valuation allowance due
to expected future utilization
|
|
|
(40.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Utilization of deferred tax assets
that had a full valuation allowance
|
|
|
(39.2
|
)
|
|
|
(34.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Reversals of previously accrued
taxes and tax refunds
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
(14.8
|
)
|
|
|
(62.0
|
)
|
Unbenefited
non-U.S. losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
Other
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit for income taxes
|
|
|
(43.1
|
)
|
|
|
(15.5
|
)
|
|
|
(60.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 55 of 65
Significant components of our deferred tax assets and
liabilities are (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31,
|
|
|
March 25,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory valuation
|
|
$
|
4,030
|
|
|
$
|
3,885
|
|
Accrued expenses and allowances
|
|
|
4,371
|
|
|
|
5,546
|
|
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
173,601
|
|
|
|
173,488
|
|
Research and development tax
credit carryforwards
|
|
|
35,561
|
|
|
|
35,143
|
|
State investment tax credit
carryforwards
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
1,088
|
|
Capitalized research and
development
|
|
|
40,605
|
|
|
|
49,736
|
|
Depreciation and Amortization
|
|
|
4,224
|
|
|
|
4,364
|
|
Other
|
|
|
10,585
|
|
|
|
10,459
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax asset
|
|
$
|
273,377
|
|
|
$
|
283,709
|
|
Valuation allowance for deferred
tax assets
|
|
|
(265,485
|
)
|
|
|
(283,369
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
7,892
|
|
|
$
|
340
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Acquisition intangibles
|
|
$
|
1,324
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
|
$
|
1,324
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
6,568
|
|
|
$
|
340
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The valuation allowance decreased by $17.9 million in
fiscal year 2007 and decreased by $18.1 million in fiscal
year 2006. During fiscal year 2007, we released
$7.8 million of the valuation allowance that had been
placed on our U.S. deferred tax assets. Based on our recent
history of utilizing deferred tax assets and our expectation to
continue to utilize deferred tax assets in fiscal year 2008, we
determined that it was more likely than not that the
$7.8 million of U.S. deferred tax assets would be
realized. We also recorded a nonrecurring tax benefit totaling
$0.7 million that consisted of the reversal of prior year
non-U.S. tax
liabilities. These reversals were due to the expiration of the
statute of limitations for years in which certain potential
non-U.S. tax
liabilities existed. At March 31, 2007, we had federal net
operating losses carryforwards of $468.4 million. Of that
amount, $75.4 million relates to companies we acquired
during fiscal year 2002 and are, therefore, subject to certain
limitations under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code.
In addition, approximately $30.3 million of the federal net
operating loss is attributable to employee stock option
deductions, the benefit from which will be allocated to
additional paid-in capital rather than current earnings if
subsequently realized. We have net operating losses in various
states that total $120.0 million. The federal net operating
loss carryforwards expire in fiscal years 2008 through 2027. The
state net operating loss carryforwards expire in fiscal years
2008 through 2027. We also have
non-U.S. net
operating losses of $5.1 million of which $3.6 million
do not expire and $1.5 million expire in calendar years
2009 through 2011.
There are federal research and development credit carryforwards
of $20.8 million that expire in fiscal years 2008 through
2027. There are $14.7 million of state research and
development credits. Of that amount, $3.0 million will
expire in fiscal years 2021 through 2026. The remaining
$11.7 million of state research and development credits are
not subject to expiration. The state investment credits of
$0.4 million will expire in fiscal years 2008 through 2010.
We have approximately $5.7 million of cumulative
undistributed earnings in certain
non-U.S. subsidiaries.
We have not recognized a deferred tax liability on these
undistributed earnings because the Company currently intends to
reinvest these earnings in operations outside the U.S. The
unrecognized deferred tax liability on these earnings is
approximately $2.1 million. With our current tax
attributes, if the earnings were distributed, we would most
likely not accrue any additional current income tax expense
because this income would be offset by our net operating loss
carryforwards and other future deductions.
Our current income taxes payable balance is comprised primarily
of tax contingencies that are recorded to address exposures
involving tax positions we have taken that could be challenged
by taxing authorities. These exposures result from the varying
application of statutes, rules, regulations, and
interpretations. Our tax contingencies are established based on
past experiences and judgments about potential actions by taxing
jurisdictions. Our tax contingencies relate to transfer pricing
positions we have taken in a variety of countries in which we
operate. The ultimate resolution of these matters may be
materially greater or less than the amount that we have accrued.
Page 56 of 65
We are a premier supplier of high-precision analog and
mixed-signal ICs for a broad range of consumer, professional,
and industrial markets. We develop and market ICs and embedded
software used by original equipment manufacturers. We also
provide complete system reference designs based on our
technology that enable our customers to bring products to market
in a timely and cost-effective manner. We determine our
operating segments in accordance with Statement of Financial
Accounting Standard No. 131 (SFAS 131),
Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related
Information. Our chief executive officer
(CEO) has been identified as the chief operating
decision maker as defined by SFAS 131.
Our CEO receives and uses enterprise-wide financial information
to assess financial performance and allocate resources, rather
than detailed information at a product line level. Additionally,
our product lines have similar characteristics and customers.
They share operations support functions such as sales, public
relations, supply chain management, various research and
development and engineering support, in addition to the general
and administrative functions of human resources, legal, finance
and information technology. As of March 31, 2007, we have
one operating segment with three different product lines.
Our revenue by product line is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2007
|
|
|
March 25, 2006
|
|
|
March 26, 2005
|
|
|
Mixed-signal audio products
|
|
$
|
85,278
|
|
|
$
|
95,384
|
|
|
$
|
96,083
|
|
Embedded products
|
|
|
46,791
|
|
|
|
52,258
|
|
|
|
46,645
|
|
Industrial products
|
|
|
50,235
|
|
|
|
34,771
|
|
|
|
34,109
|
|
Video products
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,281
|
|
|
|
18,063
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
182,304
|
|
|
$
|
193,694
|
|
|
$
|
194,900
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On December 29, 2006, we completed the acquisition of
100 percent of the voting equity interests in Caretta, a
company based in Shanghai, China that specializes in designing
power management integrated circuits for the large, single-cell
lithium ion battery market. At the current time, we are
including revenue from these products as a component of the
Industrial product line. For further details regarding the
acquisition of Caretta, please see Note 5,
Acquisitions.
On June 30, 2005, we completed the sale of our digital
video product line assets to Magnum Semiconductor, Inc. By
selling the digital video product line assets, we are able to
focus on our core analog, mixed-signal and embedded product
lines for audio and industrial markets. We no longer have
digital video product revenue due to this transaction. With the
sale of the digital video product line assets, we have
reclassified a product previously reported as part of the
digital video products as part of the embedded product line. We
retained the rights to sell this specific product as part of the
digital video product line divestiture.
Geographic
Area
The following illustrates revenues by geographic locations based
on the sales office location (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2007
|
|
|
March 25, 2006
|
|
|
March 26, 2005
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
69,515
|
|
|
$
|
71,191
|
|
|
$
|
62,885
|
|
European Union
|
|
|
17,415
|
|
|
|
25,794
|
|
|
|
26,968
|
|
United Kingdom
|
|
|
3,245
|
|
|
|
3,408
|
|
|
|
3,597
|
|
China
|
|
|
22,693
|
|
|
|
20,934
|
|
|
|
22,692
|
|
Hong Kong
|
|
|
7,064
|
|
|
|
15,451
|
|
|
|
12,537
|
|
Japan
|
|
|
14,822
|
|
|
|
11,869
|
|
|
|
9,740
|
|
South Korea
|
|
|
9,979
|
|
|
|
10,772
|
|
|
|
17,054
|
|
Taiwan
|
|
|
10,878
|
|
|
|
11,283
|
|
|
|
14,412
|
|
Other Asia
|
|
|
14,506
|
|
|
|
15,506
|
|
|
|
19,556
|
|
Other
non-U.S. countries
|
|
|
12,187
|
|
|
|
7,486
|
|
|
|
5,459
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consolidated revenues
|
|
$
|
182,304
|
|
|
$
|
193,694
|
|
|
$
|
194,900
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 57 of 65
The following illustrates property and equipment, net, by
geographic locations, based on physical location
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, 2007
|
|
|
March 25, 2006
|
|
|
United States
|
|
$
|
10,928
|
|
|
$
|
13,557
|
|
United Kingdom
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
35
|
|
China
|
|
|
264
|
|
|
|
175
|
|
Hong Kong
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
51
|
|
Japan
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
South Korea
|
|
|
78
|
|
|
|
114
|
|
Taiwan
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
Other Asia
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
87
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consolidated property and
equipment, net
|
|
$
|
11,407
|
|
|
$
|
14,051
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16.
|
Quarterly
Results (Unaudited)
|
The following quarterly results have been derived from our
audited annual consolidated financial statements. In the opinion
of management, this unaudited quarterly information has been
prepared on the same basis as the annual consolidated financial
statements and includes all adjustments, including normal
recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair presentation of this
quarterly information. This information should be read along
with the financial statements and related notes. The operating
results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of
results to be expected for any future period.
The unaudited quarterly statement of operations data for each
quarter of fiscal years 2007 and 2006 were as follows (in
thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2007
|
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
43,647
|
|
|
$
|
45,297
|
|
|
$
|
48,179
|
|
|
$
|
45,181
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
26,278
|
|
|
|
27,411
|
|
|
|
28,165
|
|
|
|
27,160
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
7,279
|
|
|
|
3,464
|
|
|
|
9,327
|
|
|
|
7,825
|
|
Basic income per share
|
|
$
|
0.08
|
|
|
$
|
0.04
|
|
|
$
|
0.11
|
|
|
$
|
0.09
|
|
Diluted income per share
|
|
|
0.08
|
|
|
|
0.04
|
|
|
|
0.11
|
|
|
|
0.09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2006
|
|
|
4th Quarter
|
|
3rd Quarter
|
|
2nd Quarter
|
|
1st Quarter
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
42,158
|
|
|
$
|
48,253
|
|
|
$
|
50,461
|
|
|
$
|
52,822
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
24,475
|
|
|
|
26,565
|
|
|
|
26,853
|
|
|
|
27,299
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
|
14,946
|
|
|
|
12,681
|
|
|
|
(1,109
|
)
|
|
|
25,908
|
|
Basic income (loss) per share
|
|
$
|
0.17
|
|
|
$
|
0.15
|
|
|
$
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.30
|
|
Diluted income (loss) per share
|
|
|
0.17
|
|
|
|
0.14
|
|
|
|
(0.01
|
)
|
|
|
0.30
|
|
|
|
17.
|
Related
Party Transactions
|
The Company had two outstanding loans to Mr. David D.
French (Mr. French), our former President and
Chief Executive Officer, only one of which remained outstanding
as of March 31, 2007. Both loans were
grandfathered under Section 402 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which prohibits loans to directors
and executive officers that are made, renewed or materially
modified after July 30, 2002. Neither of the loans
described below have been modified or renewed since the Company
made them to Mr. French.
In October 1998, the Company extended a loan to Mr. French
for the purchase of his principal residence in Texas. The
original principal amount of the loan was $721,899 and carries
an interest rate of 5.64 percent per annum. The terms of
the loan state that the principal and accrued interest is due
and payable on the earlier of (i) September 1, 2013,
(ii) 180 days following the date of the termination of
his employment for any reason, or (iii) upon sale of the
residence. On March 5, 2007, just before the end of fiscal
year 2007, Mr. French resigned in light of the findings of
a voluntary review of the Companys past stock option
granting practices performed by a Special Committee of the
Companys Board of Directors (the Board).
Pursuant to the terms described above, the loan will now be due
and payable no later than September 1, 2007, although
payment may be required sooner should the residence be sold
before that date. The aggregate amount of principal plus accrued
interest outstanding under this loan at the end of fiscal years
2007 and 2006 was $1,151,000 and $1,088,000 and, respectively.
This loan is currently classified as a short-term asset on the
balance
Page 58 of 65
sheet under Other current assets. In the
event of his death or disability, the principal and accrued
interest will be forgiven, subject to applicable law.
In July 1999, the Company also advanced a personal loan in the
original principal amount of $750,000 to Mr. French. The
note bore interest at 5.82 percent per annum and was
secured by 90,000 shares of the Companys common stock
held in escrow. The note and accrued interest were due and
payable upon the earlier of (i) July 21, 2004 or
(ii) 180 days following the termination of
Mr. Frenchs employment. The aggregate amount of
principal plus accrued interest outstanding under this loan at
the end of fiscal year 2004 was $978,079 and was classified as a
current asset. During fiscal year 2005, the loan accrued an
additional $17,397 of interest. On July 21, 2004,
Mr. French fulfilled his obligation with respect to this
loan and paid the final outstanding balance of $995,476.
|
|
ITEM 9.
|
Changes
in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and
Financial Disclosure
|
None.
|
|
ITEM 9A.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
A Board-appointed Special Committee recently completed an
investigation into our historical stock option granting
practices. In light of the findings of the Special Committee and
the restatement of our financial statements for fiscal years
2002 through 2006 as well as the first quarter of fiscal year
2007, management re-evaluated the assessment presented in
Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting in our Annual Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended March 25, 2006. As stated in the
Amended Annual Report
10-K/A filed
with the SEC on April 18, 2007, management concluded that
the Company had a material weakness with respect to our control
environment as it relates to stock option granting practices,
including the involvement of our former CEO in the grant
process, and that, solely for this reason, its internal control
over financial reporting and its disclosure controls and
procedures were not effective as of March 25, 2006.
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are intended
to ensure that the information required to be disclosed in our
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act)
filings are properly and timely recorded and reported. Our
management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
effective internal controls over financial reporting. We have
formed a Disclosure Review Committee comprised of key
individuals from several disciplines within the Company who are
involved in the disclosure and reporting process. This
committee, which is led by the Corporate Controller, meets
periodically to ensure the timeliness, accuracy, and
completeness of the information required to be disclosed in our
filings.
In connection with the filing of this Annual Report on
Form 10-K,
our current management, under the supervision of our CEO and
Chief Financial Officer (CFO), conducted an
evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures as of
March 31, 2007. Based on this evaluation, our CEO and CFO
concluded that the Company has remediated the material weakness
in internal control over financial reporting relating to stock
option granting practices and that our disclosure controls and
procedures were effective at a reasonable assurance level on
March 31, 2007.
Managements
Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
effective internal control over financial reporting, as such
term is defined under
Rule 13a-15(f).
Under the supervision and with the participation of our
management, including our CEO and CFO, we assessed the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting
as of the end of the period covered by this report based on the
framework in Internal Control-Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission.
Because of its inherent limitation, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. In
addition, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to
future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions and that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
Based on its assessment of internal control over financial
reporting, management has concluded that our internal control
over financial reporting was effective as of March 31, 2007
to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of our
financial reporting and the preparation of our financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
Page 59 of 65
Our independent registered public accounting firm,
Ernst & Young LLP, has issued an attestation report on
managements updated assessment of our internal control
over financial reporting as of March 31, 2007, included in
Item 8 of this report.
Remediation
of the Material Weaknesses in Internal Control over Financial
Reporting
Beginning November, 2002, the Company has implemented a number
of improvements to its internal grant procedures. In particular,
we implemented improvements to our granting processes for
broad-based annual grants. For annual grants after 2002, the
Company followed a practice to ensure:
|
|
|
|
|
The grant date was established at a Board or Committee meeting
prior to the grant date; and
|
|
|
|
The list of recipients was final and approved by the grant date.
|
Further, for monthly grants after 2002, the Company followed a
monthly grant process for obtaining approval of proposed option
grants (the Monthly Consent Process) to ensure:
|
|
|
|
|
A more formalized process and checklist was completed with
regard to the Monthly Consent Process; and
|
|
|
|
Proposed unanimous written consents (UWCs) for
option grants were sent to the Compensation Committee on the
monthly grant date, which was usually the first Wednesday of
each month (the Monthly Grant Date).
|
In 2005, the Monthly Consent Process was further refined as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Proposed UWCs for option grants were sent to the Compensation
Committee on Friday a week prior to the Monthly Grant Date to
allow additional time to review; and
|
|
|
|
The bylaws were amended to permit electronic approvals of
UWCs by the Compensation Committee.
|
In addition, during our initial internal review of stock option
granting practices in 2006, we further improved and strengthened
our Monthly Consent Process related to our stock option program
through the addition of the following controls designed to
provide appropriate safeguards and greater internal control over
the stock option granting and administrative function:
|
|
|
|
|
The stock option granting procedures have been formalized,
documented and approved by the Compensation Committee and the
Board;
|
|
|
|
Using a checklist, the Companys Stock Administrator tracks
each step of the Monthly Consent Process to ensure all items in
the process are completed and all necessary records are properly
maintained.
|
|
|
|
Approximately two weeks before the Monthly Grant Date, the Stock
Administrator creates the proposed grant list. The list is
populated from Personnel Action Notices (PANs)
received from Human Resources (HR) and Special Stock
Option Grant Requests (SSOGRs) are approved via the
SSOGR application in SAP. All requests for grants outside the
Companys grant guidelines include a Request for
Exception to Guidelines form that includes the reasons for
the proposed grant outside the Companys grant guidelines.
The vesting start date for all proposed grants is
set as the Monthly Grant Date.
|
|
|
|
The Stock Administrator sends the proposed grant list to HR to
confirm:
|
|
|
|
|
|
the list is complete and correct;
|
|
|
|
special exception forms have been obtained for any grants that
fall outside guidelines; and
|
|
|
|
there are no open negotiations with any proposed recipients
relating to any of the proposed grants.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Stock Administrator updates the information contained in the
Equity Incentive Awards
Year-to-Date
Status for Fiscal Year report, which is provided to the
Compensation Committee members on a monthly basis.
|
|
|
|
Approximately ten days prior to the Monthly Grant Date, the
Stock Administrator emails a proposed written consent and
associated exhibits to the members of the Compensation Committee.
|
|
|
|
Upon receiving consent for the grants from a member of the
Compensation Committee, the Stock Administrator records the date
the consent is received on the checklist. A Committee member may
approve the proposed UWC by signing and returning the UWC to the
Stock Administrator, or alternatively, by sending an electronic
message (e.g., email) to the Stock Administrator indicating the
Committee members approval.
|
|
|
|
If the Stock Administrator has not received the UWC from all
members of the Compensation Committee at least three days before
the Monthly Grant Date, the Stock Administrator will re-send the
request for approvals and
|
Page 60 of 65
|
|
|
|
|
another copy of the UWC. In addition, the Corporate Secretary of
the Company will provide the proper required notice of a
Compensation Meeting to be held on or before the Monthly Grant.
The purpose of the meeting will be to review the proposed option
grants previously delivered to the Committee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
After Compensation Committee approval has been received, the
Stock Administrator informs HR that the proposed grants have
been approved. HR notifies the recipient of the approved grants
by email on or prior to the Monthly Grant Date.
|
|
|
|
If the proposed grants have not been approved by the
Compensation Committee before the Monthly Grant Date, then the
Company will not grant or price any awards for that month. All
proposed grants may be included for approval in the following
months grant list and must be approved again pursuant to
these procedures.
|
|
|
|
If the Compensation Committee has approved the grants but
employees are not notified of the approvals on or before the
Monthly Grant Date, then HR contacts the General Counsel prior
to providing any such notice. The General Counsel determines
whether to proceed with notifying employees of the approved
grants or require the grants be approved again pursuant to these
procedures.
|
|
|
|
The Stock Administrator prepares a list of the approved grants
and transmits the list to the Companys Third-Party Stock
Plan Administrator.
|
|
|
|
The Stock Administrator maintains the appropriate records with
the Company corporate minute books and records.
|
|
|
|
The Stock Administrator maintains a cumulative summary document
that provides a summary of all equity incentive grants issued by
the Company for the current fiscal year.
|
|
|
|
After notifying the Companys Third Party Stock Plan
Administrator of the awards, the Stock Administrator runs a
report for the Monthly Grant Date from the Third Party Stock
Plan Administrators database to confirm that all grants
sent to them have been entered in their database under the
correct employee names and identification numbers.
|
|
|
|
Any material deviation from these procedures must be approved by
the Companys General Counsel. The Stock Administrator
notifies the Companys Chief Financial Officer and the
General Counsel of any material deviation from these procedures
that is not approved in advance by the General Counsel.
|
As of the date of this filing, these controls continue to be in
effect.
Neither management, nor the Special Committee has identified any
grant dates selected with hindsight or prior to completing the
formal approval process since 2003. The adjustments to our
financial statements principally resulted from revisions made to
measurement dates for certain options granted prior to
December 31, 2002. The Company is currently reviewing the
Special Committee recommendations to ensure that we continue to
strengthen our controls over our stock option granting process.
This material weakness was initially identified in conjunction
with the Special Committees investigation and was
remediated based upon previously implemented process
improvements and the subsequent resignation of our former chief
executive officer on March 5, 2007.
Changes
in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Except for the remediation to the material weakness described
above, there were no other changes in our internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during our most recently
completed fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control
over financial reporting.
Inherent
Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls
Our management, including the CEO and CFO, do not expect that
our Disclosure Controls or our internal control over financial
reporting will prevent or detect all error and all fraud. A
control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can
provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the
control systems objectives will be met. The design of a
control system must reflect the fact that there are resource
constraints and the benefits of controls must be considered
relative to their costs. Further, because of the inherent
limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls
can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error
or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances
of fraud, if any, within the Company have been detected. These
inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in
decision-making can be faulty and breakdowns can occur as a
result of simple errors or mistakes. Controls can also be
circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by
collusion of two or more people, or by management override of
Page 61 of 65
the controls. The design of any system of controls is based in
part on 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.
PART III
|
|
ITEM 10.
|
Directors
and Executive Officers of the Registrant
|
The information set forth in the Proxy Statement to be delivered
to stockholders in connection with our Annual Meeting of
Stockholders to be held on July 27, 2007 under the headings
Board Structure and Compensation,
Proposal 1: Election of Directors,
Executive Officers, and Section 16(a)
Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance is incorporated
herein by reference.
|
|
ITEM 11.
|
Executive
Compensation
|
The information set forth in the Proxy Statement under the
heading Executive Compensation and Other
Information, is incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
ITEM 12.
|
Security
Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and
Related Stockholder Matters
|
The information set forth in the Proxy Statement under the
heading Stock Ownership, is incorporated herein by
reference.
|
|
ITEM 13.
|
Certain
Relationships and Related Transactions
|
The information set forth in the Proxy Statement under the
heading Certain Relationships and Related
Transactions, is incorporated herein by reference.
|
|
ITEM 14.
|
Principal
Accountant Fees and Services
|
The information set forth in the Proxy Statement under the
heading Audit and Non-Audit Fees and Services, is
incorporated herein by reference.
PART IV
|
|
ITEM 15.
|
Exhibit
and, Financial Statement Schedules
|
(a) The following documents are filed as part of this
Report:
|
|
|
|
1.
|
Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reports of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet as of March 31, 2007 and
March 25, 2006.
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Operations for the fiscal years ended
March 31, 2007, March 25, 2006, and March 26,
2005.
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows for the fiscal years ended
March 31, 2007, March 25, 2006, and March 26,
2005.
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Statement of Stockholders Equity for the
fiscal years ended March 31, 2007, March 25, 2006, and
March 26, 2005.
|
|
|
|
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
|
|
|
|
2.
|
Financial Statement Schedules
|
All schedules have been omitted since the required information
is not present or not present in amounts sufficient to require
submission of the schedule, or because the information required
is included in the consolidated financial statements or notes
thereto.
Page 62 of 65
The following exhibits are filed as part of or incorporated by
reference into this Report:
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
.1
|
|
Certificate of Incorporation of
Registrant, filed with the Delaware Secretary of State on
August 26, 1998.(1)
|
|
3
|
.2
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger, filed
with the Delaware Secretary of State on February 17,
1999.(1)
|
|
3
|
.3
|
|
Certificate of Designation of
Rights, Preferences and Privileges of Series A Preferred
Stock, filed with the Delaware Secretary of State on
March 30, 1999.(1)
|
|
3
|
.4
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of
Registrant.(9)
|
|
3
|
.5
|
|
Certificate of Elimination dated
May 26, 2005(8)
|
|
10
|
.1+
|
|
Amended 1987 Stock Option Plan.(3)
|
|
10
|
.2+
|
|
1989 Employee Stock Purchase Plan,
as amended September 21, 2005.(10)
|
|
10
|
.3+
|
|
1990 Directors Stock
Option Plan, as amended.(4)
|
|
10
|
.4+
|
|
1996 Stock Plan, as amended.(4)
|
|
10
|
.5+
|
|
2002 Stock Option Plan, as
amended.(2)
|
|
10
|
.6
|
|
Form of Indemnification
Agreement.(1)
|
|
10
|
.7+
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between
Registrant and David D. French dated February 7, 2002.(5)
|
|
10
|
.8+
|
|
Executive Incentive Plan.(5)
|
|
10
|
.9
|
|
Lease between TPLP Office and
Registrant, dated April 1, 2000 for 54,385 square feet
located at 4210 S. Industrial Drive Austin, Texas.(1)
|
|
10
|
.10
|
|
Lease between ProLogis Trust and
Registrant, dated March 31, 1995 for 176,000 square
feet located at 4129 Commercial Center Drive and
4209 S. Industrial Austin, Texas, as amended through
December 20, 1996.(1)
|
|
10
|
.11
|
|
Lease between American Industrial
Properties and Registrant, dated September 15, 1999 for
18,056 square feet located at 4120 Commercial Drive
Austin, Texas.(1)
|
|
10
|
.12
|
|
Lease Agreement by and between
Desta Five Partnership, Ltd. and Registrant, dated
November 10, 2000 for 197,000 square feet located at
2901 Via Fortuna, Austin, Texas.(1)
|
|
10
|
.13
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Lease
Agreement by and between Desta Five Partnership, Ltd. and
Registrant dated November 10, 2000.(5)
|
|
10
|
.14
|
|
Amendment No. 2 to Lease
Agreement by and between Desta Five Partnership, Ltd. and
Registrant dated November 10, 2000.(2)
|
|
10
|
.15+
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between
Registrant and John T. Kurtzweil dated March 15, 2004.(6)
|
|
10
|
.16
|
|
Amended and Restated Rights
Agreement, dated as of February 17, 1999 between Cirrus
Logic, Inc. and BankBoston, N.A.(7)
|
|
10
|
.17
|
|
First Amendment to Amended and
Restated Rights Agreement dated as of May 25, 2005, between
Cirrus Logic, Inc. and BankBoston, N.A.(8)
|
|
10
|
.18
|
|
Amendment No. 3 to Lease
Agreement by and between Desta Five Partnership, Ltd. and
Registrant dated November 10, 2000.(11)
|
|
10
|
.19
|
|
Employment Agreement by and between
Registrant and Gregory S. Thomas dated May 24, 2006.(11)
|
|
10
|
.20+
|
|
Cirrus Logic, Inc. 2006 Stock
Incentive Plan.(13)
|
|
10
|
.21+
|
|
Form of Stock Option Agreement for
options granted under the Cirrus Logic, Inc. 2006 Stock
Incentive Plan.(13)
|
|
10
|
.22+
|
|
Form of Notice of Grant of Stock
Option for options granted under the Cirrus Logic, Inc. 2006
Stock Incentive Plan.(13)
|
|
10
|
.23+
|
|
Resignation Agreement between David
D. French and Cirrus Logic, Inc. dated March 5, 2007(12)
|
|
14
|
|
|
Code of Conduct.(6)
|
|
23
|
.1*
|
|
Consent of Ernst & Young
LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
24
|
.1*
|
|
Power of Attorney (see signature
page).
|
|
31
|
.1*
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer, pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
31
|
.2*
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer, pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.1*
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.2*
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
|
|
+ |
|
Indicates a management contract or compensatory plan or
arrangement. |
|
* |
|
Filed with this
Form 10-K. |
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Report on
Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2001, filed with the
Commission on June 22, 2001.
|
|
(2)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Report on Form
10-K for the
fiscal year ended March 29, 2003, filed with the Commission
on June 13, 2003.
|
|
(3)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Report on Form
10-K for the
fiscal year ended March 30, 1996, filed with the Commission
on June 28, 1996.
|
|
(4)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Registration
Statement on
Form S-8
filed with the Commission on August 8, 2001 (Registration
No. 333-67322).
|
|
(5)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Report on Form
10-K for the
fiscal year ended March 30, 2002, filed with the Commission
on June 19, 2002.
|
|
(6)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Report on Form
10-K for the
fiscal year ended March 27, 2004, filed with the Commission
on June 9, 2004.
|
|
(7)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Registration
Statement of Amendment No. 1 to
Form 8-A
filed on March 3, 1999.
|
Page 63 of 65
|
|
|
|
(8)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Report on Form
10-K for the
fiscal year ended March 26, 2005, filed with the Commission
on May 27, 2005.
|
|
(9)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Report of Form
8-K filed
with the Commission on September 21, 2005.
|
|
(10)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Report on Form
10-Q filed
with the Commission on October 25, 2005.
|
|
(11)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Report on Form
10-K for the
fiscal year ended March 25, 2006 filed with the Commission
on May 25, 2006.
|
|
(12)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrants Report on Form
8-K filed
with the Commission on March 7, 2007.
|
|
(13)
|
Incorporated by reference from Registrations Statement on
Form S-8
filed with the Commission on August 1, 2006.
|
Page 64 of 65
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.
CIRRUS LOGIC, INC.
Thurman K. Case
Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and
Chief Accounting Officer
KNOW BY THESE PRESENT, that each person whose signature appears
below constitutes and appoints Thurman K. Case, his
attorney-in-fact,
with the power of substitution, for him in any and all
capacities, to sign any amendments to this report on
Form 10-K
and to file the same, with exhibits thereto and other documents
in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of the
attorney-in-fact,
or his substitute or substitutes, may do or cause to be done by
virtue hereof.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, the following persons on behalf of the Registrant, in the
capacities and on the dates indicated have signed this report
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Signature
|
|
Title
|
|
Date
|
|
/s/ Michael
L. Hackworth
Michael
L. Hackworth
|
|
Chairman of the Board and Director
|
|
June 1, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Jason
P. Rhode
Jason
P. Rhode
|
|
President and Chief Executive
Officer
|
|
June 1, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Thurman
K. Case
Thurman
K. Case
|
|
Vice President, Chief Financial
Officer and Chief Accounting Officer
|
|
June 1, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ D.
James Guzy
D.
James Guzy
|
|
Director
|
|
June 1, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Suhas
S. Patil
Suhas
S. Patil
|
|
Chairman Emeritus and Director
|
|
June 1, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Walden
C. Rhines
Walden
C. Rhines
|
|
Director
|
|
June 1, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ William
D. Sherman
William
D. Sherman
|
|
Director
|
|
June 1, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ Robert
H. Smith
Robert
H. Smith
|
|
Director
|
|
June 1, 2007
|
Page 65 of 65
Exhibit Index
(a) The following exhibits are filed as part of this Report:
|
|
|
|
|
Number
|
|
Description
|
|
|
23
|
.1
|
|
Consent of Ernst & Young
LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.
|
|
24
|
.1
|
|
Power of Attorney (see signature
page).
|
|
31
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer, pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
31
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer, pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive
Officer, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|
|
32
|
.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial
Officer, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002.
|