e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ |
|
Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2011
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number: 000-49834
GEN-PROBE INCORPORATED
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
33-0044608 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification Number) |
|
|
|
10210 Genetic Center Drive, San Diego, CA
|
|
92121-4362 (Zip Code) |
(Address of Principal Executive
Office)
|
|
|
(858) 410-8000
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding twelve
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 ninety days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its
corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted
pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period
that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated
filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of large
accelerated filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer þ
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
|
|
Smaller Reporting Company o |
|
|
|
|
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) |
|
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Exchange Act). Yes o No þ
As of April 29, 2011, 47,941,970 shares of the registrants common stock, $0.0001 par value
per share, were outstanding.
GEN-PROBE INCORPORATED
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FORM 10-Q
i
GEN-PROBE INCORPORATED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
(unaudited) |
|
|
|
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
93,563 |
|
|
$ |
59,690 |
|
Marketable securities |
|
|
177,908 |
|
|
|
170,648 |
|
Trade accounts receivable, net of allowance for
doubtful accounts of $405 and $355 at
March 31, 2011
and December 31, 2010, respectively |
|
|
59,633 |
|
|
|
54,739 |
|
Accounts receivable other |
|
|
3,548 |
|
|
|
5,493 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
65,180 |
|
|
|
66,416 |
|
Deferred income tax |
|
|
13,774 |
|
|
|
13,634 |
|
Prepaid income tax |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
2,993 |
|
Prepaid expenses |
|
|
13,837 |
|
|
|
11,672 |
|
Other current assets |
|
|
5,698 |
|
|
|
5,148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
433,167 |
|
|
|
390,433 |
|
Marketable securities, net of current portion |
|
|
219,808 |
|
|
|
259,317 |
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
|
163,538 |
|
|
|
160,863 |
|
Capitalized software, net |
|
|
14,014 |
|
|
|
13,981 |
|
Patents, net |
|
|
12,327 |
|
|
|
12,450 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
150,639 |
|
|
|
150,308 |
|
Purchased intangibles, net |
|
|
118,338 |
|
|
|
120,270 |
|
License, manufacturing access fees and other assets, net |
|
|
62,427 |
|
|
|
60,175 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,174,258 |
|
|
$ |
1,167,797 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
11,471 |
|
|
$ |
14,614 |
|
Accrued salaries and employee benefits |
|
|
19,066 |
|
|
|
26,825 |
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
16,768 |
|
|
|
13,935 |
|
Income tax payable |
|
|
7,649 |
|
|
|
634 |
|
Short-term borrowings |
|
|
250,000 |
|
|
|
240,000 |
|
Deferred income tax |
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
1,460 |
|
|
|
1,166 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
306,505 |
|
|
|
297,174 |
|
Non-current income tax payable |
|
|
8,864 |
|
|
|
8,315 |
|
Deferred income tax |
|
|
27,308 |
|
|
|
29,775 |
|
Deferred revenue, net of current portion |
|
|
2,318 |
|
|
|
2,500 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
7,149 |
|
|
|
6,654 |
|
Commitments and contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, $0.0001 par value per share;
20,000,000 shares authorized, none issued and
outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.0001 par value per share;
200,000,000 shares authorized, 47,663,833 and
47,966,156 shares issued and outstanding at March
31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
172,133 |
|
|
|
195,820 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income |
|
|
(177 |
) |
|
|
678 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
650,153 |
|
|
|
626,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders equity |
|
|
822,114 |
|
|
|
823,379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders equity |
|
$ |
1,174,258 |
|
|
$ |
1,167,797 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
1
GEN-PROBE INCORPORATED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
(In thousands, except per share data)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product sales |
|
$ |
138,112 |
|
|
$ |
130,569 |
|
Collaborative research revenue |
|
|
3,568 |
|
|
|
3,264 |
|
Royalty and license revenue |
|
|
1,358 |
|
|
|
1,586 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
143,038 |
|
|
|
135,419 |
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales (excluding acquisition-related intangible amortization) |
|
|
41,943 |
|
|
|
42,661 |
|
Acquisition-related intangible amortization |
|
|
2,805 |
|
|
|
2,216 |
|
Research and development |
|
|
28,963 |
|
|
|
29,681 |
|
Marketing and sales |
|
|
16,522 |
|
|
|
14,781 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
18,153 |
|
|
|
14,679 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
108,386 |
|
|
|
104,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income from operations |
|
|
34,652 |
|
|
|
31,401 |
|
Other income (expense): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment and interest income |
|
|
735 |
|
|
|
3,898 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(503 |
) |
|
|
(546 |
) |
Gain on contingent consideration |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,745 |
|
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
(159 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income, net |
|
|
409 |
|
|
|
4,938 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income tax |
|
|
35,061 |
|
|
|
36,339 |
|
Income tax expense |
|
|
11,784 |
|
|
|
12,146 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
23,277 |
|
|
$ |
24,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
47,861 |
|
|
|
49,233 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
|
49,004 |
|
|
|
49,739 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
2
GEN-PROBE INCORPORATED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Operating activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
23,277 |
|
|
$ |
24,193 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
11,345 |
|
|
|
11,308 |
|
Amortization of premiums on investments, net of accretion of discounts |
|
|
2,673 |
|
|
|
2,216 |
|
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
6,036 |
|
|
|
5,902 |
|
Excess tax benefit from employee stock-based compensation |
|
|
(1,425 |
) |
|
|
(1,596 |
) |
Deferred revenue |
|
|
97 |
|
|
|
(833 |
) |
Deferred income tax |
|
|
(615 |
) |
|
|
(1,360 |
) |
Gain on contingent consideration |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,745 |
) |
Loss on disposal of property and equipment |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
Changes in assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade and other accounts receivable |
|
|
(2,816 |
) |
|
|
7,696 |
|
Inventories |
|
|
3,420 |
|
|
|
1,110 |
|
Prepaid expenses |
|
|
(2,116 |
) |
|
|
(2,200 |
) |
Other current assets |
|
|
(536 |
) |
|
|
(95 |
) |
Other long-term assets |
|
|
(132 |
) |
|
|
(257 |
) |
Accounts payable |
|
|
(3,196 |
) |
|
|
(8,065 |
) |
Accrued salaries and employee benefits |
|
|
(7,847 |
) |
|
|
(5,256 |
) |
Other accrued expenses |
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(1,630 |
) |
Income tax payable |
|
|
11,500 |
|
|
|
11,827 |
|
Other long-term liabilities |
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
(575 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
40,105 |
|
|
|
40,687 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sales and maturities of marketable securities |
|
|
30,460 |
|
|
|
139,425 |
|
Purchases of marketable securities |
|
|
(5,731 |
) |
|
|
(71,390 |
) |
Purchases of property, plant and equipment |
|
|
(10,762 |
) |
|
|
(7,828 |
) |
Purchases of capitalized software |
|
|
(780 |
) |
|
|
(1,089 |
) |
Purchases of intangible assets, including licenses and manufacturing access fees |
|
|
(923 |
) |
|
|
(722 |
) |
Other |
|
|
501 |
|
|
|
(310 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by investing activities |
|
|
12,765 |
|
|
|
58,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase and retirement of common stock |
|
|
(47,972 |
) |
|
|
(10,961 |
) |
Proceeds from issuance of common stock and employee stock purchase plan |
|
|
17,390 |
|
|
|
16,912 |
|
Repurchase and retirement of restricted stock for payment of taxes |
|
|
(358 |
) |
|
|
(39 |
) |
Excess tax benefit from employee stock-based compensation |
|
|
1,425 |
|
|
|
1,596 |
|
Borrowings, net |
|
|
10,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
|
|
(19,515 |
) |
|
|
7,508 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
(1,620 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
33,873 |
|
|
|
104,661 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of period |
|
|
59,690 |
|
|
|
82,616 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at the end of period |
|
$ |
93,563 |
|
|
$ |
187,277 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements
3
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited)
Note 1 Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation
The accompanying interim consolidated financial statements of Gen-Probe Incorporated
(Gen-Probe or the Company) at March 31, 2011, and for the three month periods ended March 31,
2011 and 2010, are unaudited and have been prepared in accordance with United States generally
accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) for interim financial information. Accordingly, they
do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. GAAP for complete financial
statements. In managements opinion, the unaudited consolidated financial statements include all
adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring accruals, necessary to state fairly the financial
information therein, in accordance with U.S. GAAP. Interim results are not necessarily indicative
of the results that may be reported for any other interim period or for the year ending December
31, 2011.
These unaudited interim consolidated financial statements and related footnotes should be read
in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and related footnotes contained
in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.
In accordance with the Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 855, Subsequent Events, the Company evaluated subsequent events after
the balance sheet date of March 31, 2011 and through the date and time its consolidated financial
statements were issued on May 4, 2011.
Principles of Consolidation
These unaudited consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Gen-Probe as well as
its wholly owned subsidiaries. All material intercompany transactions and balances have been
eliminated in consolidation. The Company does not consolidate any interests in variable interest
entities.
In December 2010, the Company acquired Genetic Testing Institute, Inc. (GTI Diagnostics), a
privately held Wisconsin corporation now known as Gen-Probe GTI Diagnostics, Inc. GTI Diagnostics
has broadened and strengthened the Companys transplant diagnostics business, and has also provided
the Company with access to new products in the specialty coagulation and transfusion-related blood
bank markets. GTI Diagnostics results of operations have been included in the Companys
consolidated financial statements beginning in December 2010.
In October 2009, the Company acquired Prodesse, Inc. (Prodesse), a privately held Wisconsin
corporation, now known as Gen-Probe Prodesse, Inc. Prodesse develops molecular diagnostic products
for a variety of infectious disease applications. Prodesses results of operations have been
included in the Companys consolidated financial statements beginning in October 2009.
In April 2009, the Company acquired Tepnel Life Sciences plc (Tepnel), a United Kingdom
(UK) based international life sciences products and services company, now known as Gen-Probe Life
Sciences Ltd. Tepnels transplant diagnostics and genetic testing results of operations have been
included in the Companys consolidated financial statements beginning in April 2009.
The Company translates the financial statements of its non-U.S. operations using the
end-of-period exchange rates for assets and liabilities and the average exchange rates for each
reporting period for results of operations. Net gains and losses resulting from the translation of
foreign financial statements and the effect of exchange rates on intercompany receivables and
payables of a long-term investment nature are recorded as a separate component of stockholders
equity under the caption Accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income. These adjustments will
affect net income upon the sale or liquidation of the underlying investment.
4
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to
make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated
financial statements. These estimates include assessing the collectability of accounts receivable,
recognition of revenues, and the valuation of the following: stock-based compensation; marketable
securities; equity investments in publicly and privately held companies; income tax; liabilities
associated with employee benefit costs; inventories; and goodwill and long-lived assets, including
patent costs, capitalized software, purchased intangibles and licenses and manufacturing access
fees. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Segment Information
The Company currently operates in one business segment, the development, manufacturing,
marketing, sales and support of molecular diagnostic products primarily to diagnose human diseases,
screen donated human blood and ensure transplant compatibility. Although the Companys products
comprise distinct product lines to serve different end markets within molecular diagnostics, the
Company does not operate its business in operating segments. The Company is managed by a single
functionally based management team that manages all aspects of the Companys business and reports
directly to the Chief Executive Officer. For all periods presented, the Company operated in a
single business segment. Revenue by product line is presented in Note 11.
Revenue Recognition
The Company records shipments of its clinical diagnostic products as product sales when the
product is shipped, title and risk of loss have passed to the customer and when collection of the resulting
receivable is reasonably assured.
The Company manufactures blood screening products according to demand schedules provided by
its collaboration partner, Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Inc. (Novartis). Upon shipment to
Novartis, the Company recognizes blood screening product sales at an agreed upon transfer price and
records the related cost of products sold. Based on the terms of the Companys collaboration
agreement with Novartis, the Companys ultimate share of the net revenue from sales to the end user
is not known until reported to the Company by Novartis. The Company then adjusts blood screening
product sales upon receipt of customer revenue reports and a net payment from Novartis of amounts
reflecting the Companys ultimate share of net sales by Novartis for these products, less the
transfer price revenues previously recognized.
In most cases, the Company provides its instrumentation to its clinical diagnostics customers
without requiring them to purchase the equipment or enter into an equipment lease. Instead, the
Company recovers the cost of providing the instrumentation in the amount it charges for its
diagnostic assays. The depreciation costs associated with an instrument are charged to cost of
product sales on a straight-line basis over the estimated life of the instrument. The costs to
maintain these instruments in the field are charged to cost of product sales as incurred.
The Company sells its instruments to Novartis for use in blood screening and records these
instrument sales upon delivery since Novartis is responsible for the placement, maintenance and
repair of the units with its customers. The Company also sells instruments to its clinical
diagnostics customers and records sales of these instruments upon delivery and receipt of customer
acceptance. Prior to delivery, each instrument is tested to meet Gen-Probes and United States Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) specifications, and is shipped fully assembled. Customer acceptance
of the Companys clinical diagnostic instrument systems requires installation and training by the
Companys technical service personnel. Installation is a standard process consisting principally of
uncrating, calibrating and testing the instrumentation.
The Company records revenue on its research products and services in the period during which
the related costs are incurred, or services are provided. This revenue consists of outsourcing
services for the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and healthcare industries, including nucleic acid
purification and analysis services, as well as the sale of monoclonal antibodies.
The Company analyzes each element of its collaborative arrangements to determine the
appropriate revenue recognition. The Company recognizes revenue on up-front payments over the
period of significant involvement
5
under the related agreements unless the fee is in exchange for products delivered or services
rendered that represent the culmination of a separate earnings process and no further performance
obligation exists under the contract.
Revenue arrangements with multiple deliverables are evaluated for proper accounting treatment.
In these arrangements, the Company records revenue as separate units of accounting if the
delivered items have value to the customer on a stand-alone basis, and if the arrangement includes
a general right of return relative to the delivered items, and delivery or performance of the
undelivered items is considered probable and substantially within the Companys control. For
transactions entered into prior to 2011, consideration was generally allocated to each unit of
accounting based on its relative fair value when objective and reliable evidence of fair value
existed for all units of accounting in an arrangement. The fair value of an item was generally the
price charged for the product, if the item was sold on a stand-alone basis. When the Company was
unable to establish fair value for delivered items or when fair value of undelivered items had not
been established, revenue was deferred until all elements were delivered and services had been
performed or until fair value could be objectively determined for any undelivered elements.
Beginning in 2011, arrangement consideration is allocated at the inception of the arrangement to
all deliverables using the relative selling price method that is based on a three-tier hierarchy.
The relative selling price method requires that the estimated selling price for each deliverable be
based on vendor-specific objective evidence (VSOE) of fair value, which represents the price
charged for each deliverable when it is sold separately or for a deliverable not yet being sold
separately, the price established by management having the relevant authority. When VSOE of fair
value is not available, third-party evidence (TPE) of fair value is acceptable, or a best
estimate of selling price if VSOE and TPE are not available. A best estimate of selling price
should be consistent with the objective of determining the price at which the Company would
transact if the deliverable were sold regularly on a stand-alone basis and should also take into
account market conditions and company specific factors.
The Company recognizes collaborative research revenue over the term of various collaboration
agreements, as negotiated monthly contracted amounts are earned or reimbursable costs are incurred
related to those agreements. Negotiated monthly contracted amounts are earned in relative
proportion to the performance required under the applicable contracts. Non-refundable license fees
are recognized over the related performance period or at the time that the Company has satisfied
all performance obligations. Milestone consideration that is contingent upon achievement of a
milestone in its entirety is recorded as revenue in the period in which the milestone is achieved
only if the milestone meets all criteria to be considered substantive. These criteria include (i)
the consideration being earned should be commensurate with either the Companys performance to
achieve the milestone or the enhancement of the value of the item delivered as a result of a
specific outcome resulting from the Companys performance to achieve the milestone, (ii) the
consideration being earned should relate solely to past performance, (iii) the consideration being
earned should be reasonable relative to all deliverables and payment terms in the arrangement, and
(iv) the milestone should be considered in its entirety and cannot be bifurcated into substantive
and non-substantive components. Any amounts received prior to satisfying the Companys revenue
recognition criteria are recorded as deferred revenue on its consolidated balance sheets.
Royalty and license revenue is recognized related to the sale or use of the Companys products
or technologies under license agreements with third parties. For those arrangements where royalties
are reasonably estimable, the Company recognizes revenue based on estimates of royalties earned
during the applicable period and adjusts for differences between the estimated and actual royalties
in the following period. Historically, these adjustments have not been material. For those
arrangements where royalties are not reasonably estimable, the Company recognizes revenue upon
receipt of royalty statements from the applicable licensee.
Stock-based Compensation
Stock-based compensation expense is recognized for restricted stock, deferred issuance
restricted stock, performance stock awards, which include awards subject to performance conditions
and/or market conditions, stock options, and shares purchasable under the Companys Employee Stock
Purchase Plan (ESPP). Stock-based compensation expense for restricted stock, deferred issuance
restricted stock, and performance condition stock awards is measured based on the closing fair
market value of the Companys common stock on the date of grant. Stock-based compensation expense
for market condition stock awards is measured based on the fair value of the award on the date of
grant using a Monte Carlo simulation model. The Monte Carlo simulation model utilizes multiple
point variables that determine the probability of satisfying the market condition stipulated in the
grant and calculates the fair value of the award.
6
The Company uses the Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing model to value stock options granted.
The determination of the fair value of share-based payment awards on the date of grant using the
Black-Scholes-Merton model is affected by the Companys stock price and the implied volatility on
its traded options, as well as the input of other subjective assumptions. These assumptions
include, but are not limited to, the expected term of stock options and the Companys expected
stock price volatility over the term of the awards.
The Company used the following weighted average assumptions to estimate the fair value of
stock options and performance stock awards granted under the Companys equity incentive plans and
the shares purchasable under the Companys ESPP, as well as the resulting average fair values for
the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Stock option plans |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
1.7 |
% |
|
|
2.1 |
% |
Volatility |
|
|
31 |
% |
|
|
32 |
% |
Dividend yield |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected term (years) |
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
Resulting average fair value |
|
$ |
17.46 |
|
|
$ |
12.71 |
|
Performance stock awards (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
1.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Volatility |
|
|
33 |
% |
|
|
|
|
Dividend yield |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected term (years) |
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
Resulting average fair value |
|
$ |
82.58 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
ESPP |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
0.2 |
% |
Volatility |
|
|
22 |
% |
|
|
26 |
% |
Dividend yield |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expected term (years) |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
Resulting average fair value |
|
$ |
12.27 |
|
|
$ |
9.65 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
These assumptions apply to the Companys market condition stock awards granted in
2011. Performance condition stock awards granted in 2010 were valued at $42.66 based on the closing
fair market value of the Companys common stock on the date of grant. |
The Companys unrecognized stock-based compensation expense as of March 31, 2011, before
income taxes and adjusted for estimated forfeitures, related to outstanding unvested share-based
payment awards was approximately as follows (in thousands, except number of years):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average |
|
|
Unrecognized |
|
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
Expense as of |
|
|
|
Expense Life |
|
|
March 31, |
|
Awards |
|
(Years) |
|
|
2011 |
|
Options |
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
$ |
35,608 |
|
Employee stock purchase plan |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
Performance stock awards |
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
|
7,694 |
|
Restricted stock |
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
3,366 |
|
Deferred issuance restricted stock |
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
993 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
47,741 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
The following table summarizes the stock-based compensation expense that the Company recorded
in its consolidated statements of income for the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Cost of product sales |
|
$ |
788 |
|
|
$ |
864 |
|
Research and development |
|
|
1,792 |
|
|
|
1,679 |
|
Marketing and sales |
|
|
612 |
|
|
|
802 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
2,844 |
|
|
|
2,557 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
6,036 |
|
|
$ |
5,902 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Income Per Share
Diluted net income per share is reported based on
the more dilutive of the treasury stock or the two-class method. Under the two-class method,
net income is allocated to common stock and participating securities. The Companys restricted
stock, deferred issuance restricted stock and performance stock awards meet the definition of
participating securities. Basic net income per share under the two-class method is computed by
dividing net income adjusted for earnings allocated to unvested stockholders for the period by the
weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the period. Diluted net income per
share under the two-class method is computed by dividing net income adjusted for earnings allocated
to unvested stockholders for the period by the weighted average number of common and common
equivalent shares outstanding during the period. The Company excludes stock options
from the calculation of diluted net income per share when the combined exercise price, average
unamortized fair values and assumed tax benefits upon exercise are greater than the average market
price for the Companys common stock because their effect is anti-dilutive. Potentially dilutive
securities totaling approximately 688,000 and 4,179,000 for the three month periods ended March 31,
2011 and 2010, respectively, were excluded from the calculations of diluted earnings per share (EPS)
below because of their anti-dilutive effect.
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted EPS for the three month
periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010 (in thousands, except per share amounts):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Per Share |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Per Share |
|
|
|
Income |
|
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Income |
|
|
Outstanding |
|
|
Amount |
|
Net income |
|
$ |
23,277 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
24,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Earnings allocated to unvested stockholders |
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(101 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic EPS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Distributable income available to common
stockholders |
|
|
23,242 |
|
|
|
47,861 |
|
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
|
|
24,092 |
|
|
|
49,233 |
|
|
$ |
0.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of dilutive securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Add back: Undistributed earnings allocated to
unvested stockholders |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilutive stock options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,054 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
506 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less: Undistributed earnings reallocated to
unvested stockholders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(100 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted EPS Common stock |
|
$ |
23,277 |
|
|
|
49,004 |
|
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
$ |
24,093 |
|
|
|
49,739 |
|
|
$ |
0.48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
Adoption of Recent Accounting Pronouncements
Accounting Standards Update 2010-06
In January 2010, the FASB amended ASC Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, to
require reporting entities to make new disclosures about recurring and non-recurring fair value
measurements, including significant transfers into and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair value
measurements and information about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis in
the reconciliation of Level 3 fair value measurements. Except for the detailed Level 3 roll forward
disclosures, the guidance was effective January 1, 2010. The new disclosures about purchases,
sales, issuances, and settlements in the roll forward activity for Level 3 fair value measurements
were effective for the Company as of January 1, 2011. Upon adoption, the guidance did not have a
material impact on the Companys consolidated financial statements and is not expected to have a
material impact on its future operating results.
Accounting Standards Update 2010-17
In March 2010, the FASB ratified the final consensus that offers an alternative method of
revenue recognition for milestone payments. The guidance states that an entity can make an
accounting policy election to recognize a payment that is contingent upon the achievement of a
substantive milestone in its entirety in the period in which the milestone is achieved. The
guidance will be effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning on
or after June 15, 2010 with early adoption permitted, provided that the revised guidance is applied
retrospectively to the beginning of the year of adoption. The Company elected to adopt this
guidance prospectively, effective for the Companys fiscal year beginning January 1, 2011. Upon
adoption, the guidance did not have a material impact on the Companys consolidated financial
statements and is not expected to have a material impact on its future operating results.
Accounting Standards Update 2009-13
In September 2009, the FASB revised the authoritative guidance for revenue arrangements with
multiple deliverables. The guidance addresses how to determine whether an arrangement involving
multiple deliverables contains more than one unit of accounting and how the arrangement
consideration should be allocated among the separate units of accounting. The guidance may be
applied retrospectively or prospectively for new or materially modified arrangements. The Company
elected to adopt this guidance prospectively, effective for the Companys fiscal year beginning
January 1, 2011. Upon adoption, the guidance did not have a material impact on the Companys
consolidated financial statements and is not expected to have a material impact on its future
operating results.
Note 2 Business Combination
The acquisition below was accounted for as a business combination and, accordingly, the
Company has included the results of operations of the acquired entity in its consolidated
statements of income from the date of acquisition. Neither separate financial statements nor pro
forma results of operations have been presented because the acquisition does not meet the
quantitative materiality tests under Regulation S-X.
Acquisition of GTI Diagnostics
In December 2010, the Company acquired GTI Diagnostics, a privately held specialty diagnostics
company focused on the transplantation, specialty coagulation and transfusion-related blood bank
markets, for $53.0 million on a net-cash basis. As a result of the acquisition, GTI Diagnostics
became a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. The Company financed the acquisition with cash on
hand.
9
The purchase price allocation for the acquisition of GTI Diagnostics set forth below is
preliminary and subject to change as more detailed analysis is completed and additional information
with respect to the fair value of the assets and liabilities acquired becomes available. The
Company expects to finalize the purchase price allocation during the remainder of 2011. The
preliminary allocation of the purchase price for the Companys acquisition of GTI Diagnostics is as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchase price |
|
$ |
53,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net working capital |
|
$ |
7,881 |
|
Fixed assets |
|
|
1,001 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
28,005 |
|
Deferred tax liabilities |
|
|
(11,137 |
) |
Other intangible assets |
|
|
32,100 |
|
Liabilities assumed |
|
|
(4,850 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Allocated purchase price |
|
$ |
53,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
The fair values of the acquired identifiable intangible assets with definite lives are as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Patents |
|
$ |
10,600 |
|
In-process research and development |
|
|
11,900 |
|
Customer relationships |
|
|
3,500 |
|
Trade secrets |
|
|
6,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
32,100 |
|
|
|
|
|
The amortization periods for the acquired identifiable intangible assets with definite lives are as
follows: six to nine years for patents, ten years for customer relationships, 20 years for trade
secrets, and an estimated life to be determined for each in-process research and development
project (to commence upon commercialization of the associated product). The Company is amortizing
the acquired intangible assets set forth in the table above using the straight-line method of
amortization. The Company believes that the use of the straight-line method is appropriate given
the high customer retention rate of the acquired business and the historical and projected growth
of revenues and related cash flows. The Company will monitor and assess the acquired intangible
assets and will adjust, if necessary, the expected life, amortization method or carrying value of
such assets to best match the underlying economic value.
The fair value assigned to trade secrets has been determined primarily by using the income
approach and a variation of the income approach known as the relief from royalty method, which
estimates the future royalties which would have to be paid to the licensor of the asset for its
current use. Tax is deducted and a discount rate is used to state future cash flows to a present
value. This is based on the asset in its current use and is based on savings from owning the asset,
or relief from royalties that would be paid to the asset owner. The fair value assigned to patents,
in-process research and development, and customer relationships has been determined primarily by
using the income approach and a variation of the income approach known as the excess earnings
method, which estimates the value of an asset based on discounted future earnings specifically
attributed to that asset, that is, in excess of returns for other assets that contributed to those
earnings. The discount rates used in these valuation methods ranged from 13 to 16 percent.
10
The estimated amortization expense for the acquired identifiable intangible assets over future periods,
excluding the in-process research and development assets due to uncertainty with respect to the
commercialization of such assets, is as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ending December 31, |
|
|
|
|
Remainder of 2011 |
|
$ |
1,490 |
|
2012 |
|
|
1,987 |
|
2013 |
|
|
1,987 |
|
2014 |
|
|
1,987 |
|
2015 |
|
|
1,987 |
|
Thereafter |
|
|
10,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
19,741 |
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in Goodwill Resulting From Acquisitions
The $53.0 million purchase price for GTI Diagnostics exceeded the value of the acquired
tangible and identifiable intangible assets, and therefore the Company allocated $28.0 million to
goodwill. Included in this initial goodwill amount was $11.1 million primarily related to deferred
tax liabilities recorded as a result of non-deductible amortization of acquired identifiable intangible assets.
Changes in goodwill for the three months ended March 31, 2011 were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill balance as of December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
150,308 |
|
Changes due to foreign currency translation |
|
|
331 |
|
|
|
|
|
Goodwill balance as of March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
150,639 |
|
|
|
|
|
Note 3 Consolidation of UK Operations
Following its acquisition of Tepnel in April 2009, the Company had four locations in the UK:
Manchester, Cardiff, Livingston, and Abingdon. In order to accommodate the anticipated growth in
the business and to optimize expenses, the Company decided to consolidate its UK operations to
Manchester and Livingston. This consolidation was communicated internally in May 2010.
Consolidation activities related to the employees and facilities were accounted for under ASC Topic
420, Exit or Disposal Costs (ASC 420). The Company estimates that expenses related to this
consolidation will total approximately $4.2 million and be incurred over a two-year period, as the
consolidation will occur in phases. These expenses will include termination costs, including
severance costs related to the elimination of certain redundant positions and relocation costs for
certain key employees, and site closure costs.
During the three months ended March 31, 2011, the Company recorded approximately $0.4 million
and $0.7 million of termination costs and site closure costs, respectively. These amounts are
included in general and administrative expenses in the Companys consolidated statements of income.
As of March 31, 2011, the Company has recorded approximately $0.9 million and $1.3 million of
cumulative termination costs and site closure costs, respectively, related to its UK consolidation
activities.
The following table summarizes the restructuring activities accounted for under ASC 420 for
the three months ended March 31, 2011, as well as the remaining restructuring accrual recorded on
the Companys consolidated balance sheets at March 31, 2011 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Termination |
|
|
Site Closure |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs |
|
|
Costs |
|
|
Total |
|
Restructuring reserves at December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
298 |
|
|
$ |
79 |
|
|
$ |
377 |
|
Charged to expenses |
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
711 |
|
|
|
1,082 |
|
Amounts paid |
|
|
(518 |
) |
|
|
(380 |
) |
|
|
(898 |
) |
Foreign currency translation |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restructuring reserves at March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
152 |
|
|
$ |
410 |
|
|
$ |
562 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
Note 4 Balance Sheet Information
The following tables provide details of selected balance sheet items as of March 31, 2011 and
December 31, 2010 (in thousands):
Inventories
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Raw materials and supplies |
|
$ |
18,238 |
|
|
$ |
16,915 |
|
Work in process |
|
|
24,642 |
|
|
|
21,446 |
|
Finished goods |
|
|
22,300 |
|
|
|
28,055 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventories |
|
$ |
65,180 |
|
|
$ |
66,416 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, Plant and Equipment, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Land |
|
$ |
19,287 |
|
|
$ |
19,287 |
|
Building |
|
|
80,010 |
|
|
|
80,010 |
|
Machinery and equipment |
|
|
199,650 |
|
|
|
195,927 |
|
Building improvements |
|
|
48,671 |
|
|
|
48,217 |
|
Furniture and fixtures |
|
|
22,451 |
|
|
|
21,999 |
|
Construction in-progress |
|
|
3,863 |
|
|
|
1,855 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, at cost |
|
|
373,932 |
|
|
|
367,295 |
|
Less: accumulated depreciation and amortization |
|
|
(210,394 |
) |
|
|
(206,432 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net |
|
$ |
163,538 |
|
|
$ |
160,863 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased Intangibles, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Purchased intangibles, at cost |
|
$ |
167,110 |
|
|
$ |
166,541 |
|
Less: accumulated amortization |
|
|
(48,772 |
) |
|
|
(46,271 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased intangibles, net |
|
$ |
118,338 |
|
|
$ |
120,270 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
License, Manufacturing Access Fees and Other Assets, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
License and manufacturing access fees |
|
$ |
67,806 |
|
|
$ |
64,259 |
|
Investment in Qualigen |
|
|
5,404 |
|
|
|
5,404 |
|
Investment in DiagnoCure |
|
|
5,000 |
|
|
|
5,000 |
|
Investment in Roka |
|
|
725 |
|
|
|
725 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
10,763 |
|
|
|
8,782 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
License, manufacturing access fees and other assets, at cost |
|
|
89,698 |
|
|
|
84,170 |
|
Less: accumulated amortization |
|
|
(27,271 |
) |
|
|
(23,995 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
License, manufacturing access fees and other assets, net |
|
$ |
62,427 |
|
|
$ |
60,175 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12
Other Accrued Expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Royalties |
|
$ |
3,422 |
|
|
$ |
3,315 |
|
Capitalized license fees |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development |
|
|
3,452 |
|
|
|
3,385 |
|
Professional fees |
|
|
1,474 |
|
|
|
1,182 |
|
Marketing |
|
|
855 |
|
|
|
1,177 |
|
Interest |
|
|
991 |
|
|
|
896 |
|
Warranty |
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
373 |
|
Other |
|
|
3,279 |
|
|
|
3,607 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other accrued expenses |
|
$ |
16,768 |
|
|
$ |
13,935 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 5 Marketable Securities
The Companys marketable securities include equity securities, treasury securities, tax
advantaged municipal securities and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) insured
corporate bonds with a minimum Moodys credit rating of A3 or a Standard & Poors credit rating of
A-. The Companys investment policy limits the effective maturity on individual securities to six
years and an average portfolio maturity to three years. As of March 31, 2011, the Companys
portfolio had an average maturity of two years and an average credit quality of AA1 as defined by
Moodys.
The following is a summary of marketable securities as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Gains |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities |
|
$ |
353,048 |
|
|
$ |
643 |
|
|
$ |
(2,010 |
) |
|
$ |
351,681 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,965 |
) |
|
|
46,035 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
403,048 |
|
|
$ |
643 |
|
|
$ |
(5,975 |
) |
|
$ |
397,716 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
Cost |
|
|
Gains |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debt securities |
|
$ |
380,242 |
|
|
$ |
561 |
|
|
$ |
(2,968 |
) |
|
$ |
377,835 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
2,130 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,130 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
430,242 |
|
|
$ |
2,691 |
|
|
$ |
(2,968 |
) |
|
$ |
429,965 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table shows the estimated fair values and gross unrealized losses as of
March 31, 2011 for the Companys investments in individual debt securities that have been in a
continuous unrealized loss position deemed to be temporary for less than 12 months and for more
than 12 months (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 12 Months |
|
|
More than 12 Months |
|
Estimated |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
$ |
196,344 |
|
|
$ |
(2,009 |
) |
|
$ |
2,350 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13
At March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, the Company had 83 and 110 marketable debt
securities, respectively, in an unrealized loss position. Of the 83 securities in an unrealized
loss position at March 31, 2011, the average estimated fair value and average unrealized loss was
$2.4 million and $24,000, respectively. Of the 110 securities in an unrealized loss position at
December 31, 2010, the average estimated fair value and average unrealized loss was $2.1 million
and $27,000, respectively. The decrease in the number of debt securities held in an unrealized loss
position from 2010 to 2011 is due to the timing of purchases and sales of the Companys debt
securities in 2011, along with increases in market interest rates.
The contractual terms of the debt securities held by the Company do not permit the issuer to
settle the securities at a price less than the amortized cost of the investments. The Company does
not consider its investments in debt securities with a current unrealized loss position to be
other-than-temporarily impaired at March 31, 2011 because the Company does not intend to sell the
investments and it is not more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the
investments before recovery of their amortized cost.
The following table shows the current and non-current classification of the Companys
marketable securities as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Current |
|
$ |
177,908 |
|
|
$ |
170,648 |
|
Non-current |
|
|
219,808 |
|
|
|
259,317 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable securities |
|
$ |
397,716 |
|
|
$ |
429,965 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of March 31, 2011, the Company held non-current marketable debt securities and
marketable equity securities of $173.8 million and $46.0 million, respectively. As of December 31,
2010, the Company held non-current marketable debt securities and marketable equity securities of
$207.2 million and $52.1 million, respectively. Investments in an unrealized loss position deemed
to be temporary at March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010 that have a contractual maturity of greater
than 12 months have been classified on the Companys consolidated balance sheets as non-current
marketable securities under the caption Marketable securities, net of current portion, reflecting
the Companys current intent and ability to hold such investments to maturity. The Companys
investments in marketable debt securities and marketable equity securities are classified as
available-for-sale.
The following table shows the gross realized gains and losses from the sale of marketable
securities, based on the specific identification method, for the three month periods ended March
31, 2011 and 2010 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Proceeds from sale of marketable securities |
|
$ |
30,153 |
|
|
$ |
140,581 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross realized gains |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
2,227 |
|
Gross realized losses |
|
|
(356 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net realized (loss) gain |
|
$ |
(354 |
) |
|
$ |
2,227 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 6 Fair Value Measurements
The Company determines the fair value of its assets and liabilities based on the exchange
price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (exit price) in the
principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between
market participants as of the measurement date. There is an established hierarchy for inputs used
in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of
unobservable inputs by requiring that the most observable inputs be used when available. Observable
inputs are inputs market participants would use in valuing the asset or liability and are developed
based on market data obtained from sources independent of the Company. Unobservable inputs are
inputs that reflect the Companys assumptions about the factors market participants would use in
valuing the asset or liability. The guidance establishes three levels of inputs that may be used to
measure fair value:
14
|
|
|
Level 1 Quoted prices for identical instruments in active markets. |
|
|
|
|
Level 2 Quoted prices for similar instruments in active markets; quoted prices for
identical or similar instruments in markets that are not active; and model-derived
valuations in which all significant inputs and significant value drivers are observable in
active markets. |
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Valuations derived from valuation techniques in which one or more
significant inputs or significant value drivers are unobservable. |
Assets and liabilities are classified based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to
the fair value measurement. The carrying amounts of financial instruments such as cash equivalents,
accounts receivable, prepaid and other current assets, accounts payable and other current
liabilities approximate the related fair values due to the short-term maturities of these
instruments. The Company reviews the fair value hierarchy on a quarterly basis. Changes in the
observations or valuation inputs may result in a reclassification of levels for certain securities
within the fair value hierarchy.
Set forth below is a description of the Companys valuation methodologies used for assets and
liabilities measured at fair value, as well as the general classification of such instruments
pursuant to the valuation hierarchy. Where appropriate, the description includes details of the
valuation models, the key inputs to those models, as well as any significant assumptions.
Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis
The Companys marketable securities include equity securities, treasury securities, tax
advantaged municipal securities, FDIC insured corporate bonds and money market funds. When
available, the Company uses quoted market prices to determine fair value, and classifies such items
as Level 1. If quoted market prices are not available, prices are determined using prices for
recently traded financial instruments with similar underlying terms as well as directly or
indirectly observable inputs, such as interest rates and yield curves that are observable at
commonly quoted intervals. The Company classifies such items as Level 2.
In connection with a collaboration agreement the Company entered into with Pacific Biosciences
of California, Inc. (Pacific Biosciences) in June 2010, the Company purchased $50.0 million of
Pacific Biosciences Series F preferred stock, as a participant in Pacific Biosciences Series F
preferred stock round of financing that raised a total of approximately $109.0 million. In October
2010, Pacific Biosciences completed an initial public offering of its common stock, which now
trades on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol PACB. As a result of the initial
public offering, the preferred stock held by the Company was converted into common stock. During
the quarter ended December 31, 2010, the Company reclassified its investment in Pacific Biosciences
from a Level 3 investment to a Level 1 investment. The Companys investment in Pacific Biosciences,
which totaled $46.0 million as of March 31, 2011, is included in Marketable securities, net of
current portion, on the Companys consolidated balance sheets. The Companys investment in Pacific
Biosciences common stock was subject to a customary lock-up period, which generally prohibited the
Company from selling or otherwise transferring such securities for a 180 day period after the date
of the final prospectus relating to Pacific Biosciences initial public offering. This lock-up
period expired in April 2011. As of May 4, 2011, the Company continues to hold this investment.
15
The following table presents the Companys fair value hierarchy for assets and liabilities measured
at fair value on a recurring basis (as described above) as of March 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010
(in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at March 31, 2011 |
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
Total Carrying |
|
|
|
for Identical |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
Value in the |
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
Balance Sheet |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
26,785 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
26,785 |
|
Marketable securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities |
|
|
46,035 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46,035 |
|
Municipal securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
351,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
351,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable securities |
|
|
46,035 |
|
|
|
351,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
397,716 |
|
Deferred compensation plan assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,587 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,587 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets at fair value |
|
$ |
46,035 |
|
|
$ |
385,053 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
431,088 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation plan liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,044 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities at fair value |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,044 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,044 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
|
Quoted Prices in |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Active Markets |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Significant |
|
|
Total Carrying |
|
|
|
for Identical |
|
|
Observable |
|
|
Unobservable |
|
|
Value in the |
|
|
|
Assets |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Inputs |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
|
|
(Level 1) |
|
|
(Level 2) |
|
|
(Level 3) |
|
|
Balance Sheet |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash equivalents |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,211 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,211 |
|
Marketable securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities |
|
|
52,130 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52,130 |
|
Treasury securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,891 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,891 |
|
Municipal securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
366,300 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
366,300 |
|
Corporate obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,644 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,644 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total marketable securities |
|
|
52,130 |
|
|
|
377,835 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
429,965 |
|
Deferred compensation plan assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,298 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,298 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets at fair value |
|
$ |
52,130 |
|
|
$ |
385,344 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
437,474 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred compensation plan liabilities |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,246 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,246 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities at fair value |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,246 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
6,246 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value on a Non-recurring Basis
Certain assets and liabilities, including cost method investments, are measured at fair value
on a non-recurring basis and therefore are not included in the table above. Such instruments are
not measured at fair value on an ongoing basis but are subject to fair value adjustments in certain
circumstances (for example, when there is evidence of impairment).
Equity Investment in Public Company
In April 2009, the Company made a $5.0 million preferred stock investment in DiagnoCure, Inc.
(DiagnoCure), a publicly-held company traded on the Toronto Stock Exchange. The Companys equity
16
investment was initially valued based on the transaction price under the cost method of accounting.
The market value of the underlying common stock is the most observable value of the preferred
stock, but because there is no active market for DiagnoCures preferred shares the Company has
classified its equity investment in DiagnoCure as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. The
Companys investment in DiagnoCure, which totaled $5.0 million as of March 31, 2011, is included in
Licenses, manufacturing access fees and other assets, net on the Companys consolidated balance
sheets.
Equity Investments in Private Companies
The valuation of investments in non-public companies requires significant management judgment
due to the absence of quoted market prices, inherent lack of liquidity and the long-term nature of
such assets. The Companys equity investments in private companies are initially valued based upon
the transaction price under the cost method of accounting. Equity investments in non-public
companies are classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
Roka Bioscience, Inc.
In September 2009, the Company spun-off its industrial testing assets to Roka Bioscience, Inc.
(Roka), a newly formed private company. In consideration for the contribution of assets, the
Company received shares of preferred stock representing 19.9% of Rokas capital stock on a fully
diluted basis. The Company considers Roka to be a variable interest entity in accordance with ASC
Topic 810, Consolidation. The Company is not the primary beneficiary of Roka and therefore has
not consolidated Rokas financial position or results of operations in the Companys consolidated
financial statements. The Companys investment in Roka totaled approximately $0.7 million as of
March 31, 2011, and is included in Licenses, manufacturing access fees and other assets, net on
the Companys consolidated balance sheets.
In April 2011, the Company purchased approximately $4.0 million of Rokas Series C preferred
stock as a participant in Rokas Series C preferred stock round of financing that raised a total of
approximately $20.0 million. Following this Series C investment, the Company owns shares of
preferred stock representing approximately 19% of Rokas capital stock on a fully diluted basis and
its investment in Roka totaled approximately $4.7 million.
Qualigen, Inc.
In 2006, the Company invested in Qualigen, Inc. (Qualigen), a private company. The Companys
investment in Qualigen, which totaled approximately $5.4 million as of March 31, 2011, is also
included in Licenses, manufacturing access fees and other assets, net on the Companys
consolidated balance sheets.
The Company records impairment charges when an investment has experienced a decline that is
deemed to be other-than-temporary. The determination that a decline is other-than-temporary is, in
part, subjective and influenced by many factors. Future adverse changes in market conditions or
poor operating results of investees could result in losses or an inability to recover the carrying
value of the investments, thereby possibly requiring impairment charges in the future. When
assessing investments in private companies for an other-than-temporary decline in value, the
Company considers many factors, including, but not limited to, the following: the share price from
the investees latest financing round; the performance of the investee in relation to its own
operating targets and its business plan; the investees revenue and cost trends; the investees
liquidity and cash position, including its cash burn rate; and market acceptance of the investees
products and services. From time to time, the Company may consider third party evaluations or
valuation reports. The Company also considers new products and/or services that the investee may
have forthcoming, any significant news specific to the investee, the investees competitors and/or
industry and the outlook of the overall industry in which the investee operates. In the event the
Companys judgments change as to other-than temporary declines in value, the Company may record an
impairment loss, which could have an adverse effect on its results of operations.
Note 7 Borrowings
In February 2009, the Company entered into a credit agreement with Bank of America, N.A. (Bank of America) which
provided for a one-year senior secured revolving credit facility in an amount of up to $180.0
million that is subject to a borrowing base formula. Subject to the terms of the credit agreement,
including the amount of funds that the Company is
17
permitted to borrow from time to time under the credit agreement, the revolving credit facility has
a sub-limit for the issuance of letters of credit in a face amount of up to $10.0 million. Advances
under the revolving credit facility were used to consummate the Companys acquisition of Tepnel and
are also available for other general corporate purposes. At the Companys option, loans accrue
interest at a per annum rate based on, either: the base rate (the base rate is defined as the
greatest of (i) the federal funds rate plus a margin equal to 0.50%, (ii) Bank of Americas prime
rate and (iii) the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) plus a margin equal to 1.00%); or LIBOR
plus a margin equal to 0.60%, in each case for interest periods of 1, 2, 3 or 6 months as selected
by the Company. In connection with the credit agreement, the Company also entered into a security
agreement, pursuant to which the Company secured its obligations under the credit agreement with a
first priority security interest in the securities, cash and other investment property held in
specified accounts maintained by Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, an affiliate
of Bank of America. In connection with the execution of the credit agreement with Bank of America,
the Company terminated the commitments under its unsecured bank line of credit with Wells Fargo
Bank, N.A., effective as of February 27, 2009. There were no amounts outstanding under the Wells
Fargo Bank line of credit as of the termination date.
In March 2009, the Company and Bank of America amended the credit agreement to increase the
amount that the Company can borrow from time to time under the credit agreement from $180.0 million
to $250.0 million. The term of the credit facility with Bank of America has been extended twice and
currently expires in February 2012. As of December 31, 2010, the total principal amount outstanding
under the revolving credit facility was $240.0 million. The Company borrowed the remaining $10.0
million under the revolving credit facility during the first quarter of 2011. As a result, the
total principal amount outstanding under the revolving credit facility was $250.0 million as of
March 31, 2011 and the interest rate payable on such outstanding amount was approximately 0.86%.
Note 8 Income Tax
As of March 31, 2011, the Company had total gross unrecognized tax benefits of $11.2 million.
The amount of unrecognized tax benefits (net of the federal benefit for state taxes) that would
favorably affect the Companys effective income tax rate, if recognized, was $8.7 million. The
Companys federal tax returns for the 2007 through 2009 tax years, California tax returns for the
2005 through 2009 tax years, and UK tax returns for the 2006 through 2009 tax years are subject to
future examination.
Note 9 Contingencies
Contingent Consideration
In connection with the acquisition of Prodesse, the Company was originally obligated to make
certain contingent payments to Prodesse securityholders of up to $25.0 million based on multiple
performance measures, including commercial and regulatory milestones. As a result of the failure to
achieve a specified milestone, the maximum amount of contingent consideration the Company may be
required to pay for its acquisition of Prodesse has been reduced to $15.0 million.
The Company initially recorded $18.0 million as of the date of acquisition as the fair value
of this potential contingent consideration liability. In July 2010 the Company received FDA
clearance of its ProFAST+ assay, thereby satisfying one of the acquisition-related milestones and
triggering a $10.0 million payment to former Prodesse securityholders. The fair value of the
remaining contingent consideration is $0 at March 31, 2011 because the Company does not currently
expect to make any further milestone payments related to its acquisition of Prodesse. Future
milestone payments, if any, will occur by the second quarter of 2012.
Litigation
The Company is a party to the following litigation and may also be involved in other
litigation arising in the ordinary course of business from time to time. The Company intends to
vigorously defend its interests in these matters. The Company expects that the resolution of these
matters will not have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition or results of
operations. However, due to the uncertainties inherent in litigation, no assurance can be given as
to the outcome of these proceedings.
18
Becton, Dickinson and Company
In October 2009, the Company filed a patent infringement action against Becton, Dickinson and
Company (BD) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The complaint
alleges that BDs Vipertm XTRtm testing system infringes
five of the Companys U.S. patents covering automated processes for preparing, amplifying and
detecting nucleic acid targets. The complaint also alleges that BDs ProbeTectm
Female Endocervical and Male Urethral Specimen Collection Kits for Amplified Chlamydia
trachomatis/Neisseria gonorrhoeae (CT/GC) DNA assays used with the Viper XTR testing system
infringe two of the Companys U.S. patents covering penetrable caps for specimen collection tubes.
The complaint seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief. In March 2010, the Company filed a
second complaint for patent infringement against BD in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of California alleging that BDs BD MAX Systemtm (formerly known as
the HandyLab Jaguar system) infringes four of its U.S. patents covering automated processes for
preparing, amplifying and detecting nucleic acid targets. The second complaint also seeks monetary
damages and injunctive relief. In June 2010, these two actions were consolidated into a single
legal proceeding. There can be no assurances as to the final outcome of this litigation.
Note 10 Stockholders Equity
Changes in stockholders equity for the three months ended March 31, 2011 were as follows (in
thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2010 |
|
$ |
823,379 |
|
Net income |
|
|
23,277 |
|
Other comprehensive income (loss), net |
|
|
(855 |
) |
Proceeds from the issuance of common stock and ESPP |
|
|
17,390 |
|
Issuance of common stock to board members |
|
|
87 |
|
Repurchase and retirement of common stock |
|
|
(47,972 |
) |
Repurchase and retirement of restricted stock for payment of taxes |
|
|
(358 |
) |
Stock-based compensation |
|
|
5,910 |
|
Stock-based compensation income tax benefits |
|
|
1,256 |
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at March 31, 2011 |
|
$ |
822,114 |
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive Income
All components of comprehensive income, including net income, are reported in the consolidated
financial statements in the period in which they are recognized. Comprehensive income is defined as
the change in equity during a period from transactions and other events and circumstances from
non-owner sources. Net income and other comprehensive income (loss), which includes certain changes in
stockholders equity, such as foreign currency translation of the Companys wholly owned
subsidiaries financial statements and unrealized gains and losses on the Companys
available-for-sale securities, are reported, net of their related tax effect, to arrive at
comprehensive income.
Components of comprehensive income, net of income tax, for the three month periods ended March
31, 2011 and 2010 were as follows (in thousands):
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Net income, as reported |
|
$ |
23,277 |
|
|
$ |
24,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
|
|
2,328 |
|
|
|
(2,854 |
) |
Change in net unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities during the period |
|
|
(3,413 |
) |
|
|
(2,649 |
) |
Reclassification adjustments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realized gain on available-for-sale securities, net of tax |
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
1,448 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other comprehensive loss, net |
|
|
(855 |
) |
|
|
(4,055 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income |
|
$ |
22,422 |
|
|
$ |
20,138 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock Options
A summary of the Companys stock option activity for all option plans for the three months
ended March 31, 2011 is as follows (in thousands, except per share data and number of years):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Exercise |
|
|
Contractual |
|
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Price |
|
|
Life (Years) |
|
|
Value |
|
Outstanding at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
5,700 |
|
|
$ |
46.56 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Granted |
|
|
882 |
|
|
|
63.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(420 |
) |
|
|
41.38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
46.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at March 31, 2011 |
|
|
6,141 |
|
|
$ |
49.31 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
$ |
104,737 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at March 31, 2011 |
|
|
3,782 |
|
|
$ |
47.28 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
$ |
72,209 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted Stock and Deferred Issuance Restricted Stock
A summary of the Companys restricted stock and deferred issuance restricted stock award
activity for the three months ended March 31, 2011 is as follows (in thousands, except per share
data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Grant Date |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Unvested at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
121 |
|
|
$ |
54.41 |
|
Granted |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
59.40 |
|
Vested and exercised |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
53.32 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested at March 31, 2011 |
|
|
114 |
|
|
$ |
54.55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20
Performance Stock Awards
A summary of the Companys performance stock award activity for the three months ended March
31, 2011 is as follows (in thousands, except per share data):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum |
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Average |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Eligible to |
|
|
Grant Date |
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
Receive |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
Unvested at December 31, 2010 |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
97 |
|
|
$ |
42.66 |
|
Awarded |
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
82.58 |
|
Issued |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
42.66 |
|
Cancelled |
|
|
(28 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
42.66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unvested at March 31, 2011 |
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
|
$ |
74.04 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning in 2010, the Company transitioned from its historical practice of granting
certain senior Company employees annual restricted stock awards with time-based vesting provisions
only, to granting these employees the right to receive a designated number of shares of Company
common stock based on the achievement of specific performance criteria over a defined performance
period (the Performance Stock Awards). All Performance Stock Awards have been granted under the
Companys 2003 Incentive Award Plan and are intended to qualify as performance-based compensation
under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.
In February 2010, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company granted
certain senior Company employees Performance Stock Awards based on the Companys 2010 revenues,
earnings per share and return on invested capital (collectively, the 2010 Performance Stock
Criteria). Each recipient was eligible to receive between zero and 150% of the target number of
shares of Company common stock subject to the applicable award based on actual performance as
measured against the 2010 Performance Stock Criteria. In February 2011, the Company issued an
aggregate of approximately 37,500 shares of Company common stock to award recipients based on
actual performance. One-third of the issued shares vested on the date of issuance, one-third of the
shares will vest on the first anniversary of the date of issuance and one-third of the shares will
vest on the second anniversary of the date of issuance, as long as the award recipient is employed
by the Company on each such vesting date.
In February 2011, the Compensation Committee granted certain senior Company employees
Performance Stock Awards based on the Companys adjusted relative stockholder return in comparison
to a defined market index over a three-year performance period (the 2011 Performance Stock
Criteria). Each recipient is eligible to receive between zero and 200% of the target number of
shares of Company common stock subject to the applicable award based on actual performance as
measured against the 2011 Performance Stock Criteria. Performance under the awards will be measured
annually from January 1, 2011 for performance intervals of one, two and three years, with each
performance interval representing one-third of the total potential award. Shares issued following
each annual performance measurement will be immediately vested upon issuance. Award recipients will
be eligible to receive shares issued pursuant to such awards, as long as the award recipient is
employed by the Company on each such issuance date.
Stock Repurchase Programs
In February 2011, the Companys Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $150.0
million of the Companys common stock until December 31, 2011, through negotiated or open market
transactions. There is no minimum or maximum number of shares to be repurchased under the program.
As of March 31, 2011, approximately 756,000 shares have been repurchased under this program at an average price of $63.49 per share, or approximately $48.0 million in total.
In February 2010, the Companys Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $100.0
million of the Companys common stock until December 31, 2010, through negotiated or open market
transactions. There was no minimum or maximum number of shares to be repurchased under the program.
The Company completed the program in December 2010, repurchasing and retiring approximately
2,165,000 shares since the programs inception at an average price of $46.16 per share, or approximately
$99.9 million in total.
21
Note 11 Product Line and Significant Customer Information
The Company currently operates in one business segment, the development, manufacturing,
marketing, sales and support of molecular diagnostic products primarily to diagnose human diseases,
screen donated human blood and ensure transplant compatibility.
Product sales by product line for the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010 were as
follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
% |
|
|
$ |
|
|
% |
|
Clinical diagnostics |
|
|
88,290 |
|
|
|
64 |
% |
|
|
76,893 |
|
|
|
59 |
% |
Blood screening |
|
|
46,705 |
|
|
|
34 |
% |
|
|
49,568 |
|
|
|
38 |
% |
Research products and services |
|
|
3,117 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
4,108 |
|
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total product sales |
|
|
138,112 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
130,569 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, 35% and 39%, respectively, of
total revenues were from Novartis. No other customer accounted for more than 10% of the Companys
revenues during the three month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010.
22
Item 2.
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
This report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995, which provides a safe harbor for these types of statements.
Forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking words such as
believes, expects, hopes, may, will, plans, intends, estimates, could, should,
would, continue, seeks or anticipates, or other similar words (including their use in the
negative), or by discussions of future matters, such as the development and commercialization of
new products, technology enhancements, regulatory approvals or clearance, possible changes in
legislation, expectations for future growth, estimates of future revenues, expenses, profits, cash
flows or balance sheet items, or other financial guidance and other statements that are not
historical. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance. They involve known and
unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions that may cause actual results, levels of activity,
performance or achievements to differ materially from any results, level of activity, performance
or achievements expressed or implied by any forward-looking statement. We assume no obligation to
update any forward-looking statements.
The following information should be read in conjunction with our March 31, 2011 unaudited
consolidated interim financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this quarterly
report and with our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes for the year ended
December 31, 2010 and the related Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations section contained in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2010. We also urge you to review and consider our disclosures describing various risks
that may affect our business, which are set forth under the heading Risk Factors in this
quarterly report and in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010. Some
totals included in the Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations section and elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q may not foot due to
rounding.
Overview
We are a global leader in the development, manufacture and marketing of rapid, accurate and
cost-effective molecular diagnostic products and services that are used primarily to diagnose human
diseases, screen donated human blood, and ensure transplant compatibility. Our molecular diagnostic
products are designed to detect diseases more rapidly and/or accurately than older tests, and are
among the fastest-growing categories of the in vitro diagnostics industry.
We market a broad portfolio of nucleic acid tests, or NATs, to detect infectious
microorganisms, including those causing sexually transmitted diseases, or STDs, tuberculosis, strep
throat and other infections. Our leading clinical diagnostics products include our APTIMA family of
assays that are used to detect the common STDs chlamydia and gonorrhea.
In 2009 and 2010, we expanded our portfolio of products with acquisitions focused on
transplant-related and respiratory diagnostics. Our transplant diagnostics business, which we
obtained as part of our acquisition of Tepnel in April 2009, offers diagnostics to help determine
the compatibility between donors and recipients in tissue and organ transplants. Our acquisition of
Prodesse added a portfolio of real-time polymerase chain reaction, or real-time PCR, products for
detecting influenza and other infectious organisms. In addition, in December 2010, we acquired GTI
Diagnostics, a manufacturer of certain of our transplant diagnostic products, in addition to
specialty coagulation and transfusion-related blood bank products.
In blood screening, we develop and manufacture the PROCLEIX assays, which are used to detect
human immunodeficiency virus (type 1), or HIV-1, the hepatitis C virus, or HCV, the hepatitis B
virus, or HBV, and the West Nile virus, or WNV, in donated human blood. Our blood screening
products are marketed worldwide by Novartis under Novartis trademarks. We were awarded the 2004
National Medal of Technology, the nations highest honor for technological innovation, in
recognition of our pioneering work in developing NAT testing systems to safeguard the nations
blood supply.
Several of our current and future molecular tests can be performed on our TIGRIS instrument, a
fully automated, high-throughput NAT system for diagnostics and blood screening. We are building on
the success of our TIGRIS instrument system by developing and commercializing our next-generation
PANTHER instrument, which is
23
designed to be a versatile, fully automated NAT system for low- to mid-volume laboratories. The
PANTHER instrument was CE-marked and launched in Europe in the fourth quarter of 2010.
Our development pipeline includes products to detect:
|
|
|
human papillomavirus, or HPV, which can cause cervical cancer; |
|
|
|
|
gene-based markers for prostate cancer; |
|
|
|
|
certain respiratory infections; |
|
|
|
|
antigens and antibodies that are used to determine transplant and transfusion
compatibility; and |
|
|
|
|
coagulation disorders. |
Recent Events
Financial Results
Product sales for the first quarter of 2011 were $138.1 million, compared to $130.6 million in
the same period of the prior year, an increase of 6%. Total revenues for the first quarter of 2011
were $143.0 million, compared to $135.4 million in the same period of the prior year, an increase
of 6%. Net income for the first quarter of 2011 was $23.3 million ($0.48 per diluted share),
compared to $24.2 million ($0.48 per diluted share) in the same period of the prior year, a
decrease of 4%.
Our total revenues, net income and fully diluted earnings per share during the first quarter
of 2011 included the results of operations of GTI Diagnostics, which were not included in our
results of operations for the comparable period of the prior year.
Acquisition of GTI Diagnostics
In December 2010, we acquired Genetic Testing Institute, Inc., a privately held Wisconsin
corporation which we refer to herein as GTI Diagnostics, for approximately $53.0 million on a
net-cash basis. Our acquisition of GTI Diagnostics has broadened and strengthened our transplant
diagnostics business, and has also provided us access to new products in the specialty coagulation
and transfusion-related blood bank markets.
Stock Repurchase Program
In February 2011, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $150.0 million of
our common stock until December 31, 2011, through negotiated or open market transactions. There is
no minimum or maximum number of shares to be repurchased under the program. During the first
quarter of 2011, we repurchased and retired approximately 756,000 shares under this program at an
average price of $63.49 per share, or approximately $48.0 million in total.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations is based on
our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with United States
generally accepted accounting principles, or U.S. GAAP. The preparation of these consolidated
financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts
of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses and the related disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those related to revenue
recognition, the collectability of accounts receivable, valuation of inventories and long-lived
assets, including license and manufacturing access fees, patent costs and capitalized software,
equity investments in publicly and privately held companies, accrued liabilities, income tax and
the valuation of stock-based compensation. We base our estimates on historical experience and on
various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, which form the
basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities. Senior management
has discussed the development, selection and disclosure of these estimates with the Audit Committee
of our Board of Directors. Actual results may differ from these estimates.
24
We believe there have been no significant changes during the first quarter of 2011 to the
items that we disclosed as our critical accounting policies and estimates in the Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations section of our Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
For information on the recent accounting pronouncements impacting our business, see Note 1 of
the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in this report.
Results of Operations
Product Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Clinical diagnostics |
|
$ |
88.3 |
|
|
$ |
76.9 |
|
|
$ |
11.4 |
|
|
|
15 |
% |
Blood screening |
|
|
46.7 |
|
|
|
49.6 |
|
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
|
|
-6 |
% |
Research products and services |
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
(1.0 |
) |
|
|
-24 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total product sales |
|
$ |
138.1 |
|
|
$ |
130.6 |
|
|
$ |
7.5 |
|
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a percent of total revenues |
|
|
97 |
% |
|
|
96 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our primary source of revenue comes from product sales, which consist primarily of the sale of
clinical diagnostics and blood screening products. Our clinical diagnostic product sales consist
primarily of the sale of our womens health, other infectious disease, transplant diagnostics, and
genetic testing products. The principal customers for our clinical diagnostics products include
reference laboratories, public health institutions and hospitals. The blood screening assays and
instruments we manufacture are marketed and distributed worldwide through our collaboration with
Novartis under the Procleix and Ultrio trademarks.
We recognize product sales from the manufacture and shipment of tests for screening donated
blood at the contractual transfer prices specified in our collaboration agreement with Novartis for
sales to end-user blood bank facilities located in countries where our products have obtained
governmental approvals. Blood screening product sales are then adjusted monthly corresponding to
Novartis payment to us of amounts reflecting our ultimate share of net revenue from sales by
Novartis to end users, less the transfer price revenues previously recorded. Net sales are
ultimately equal to the sales of the assays by Novartis to third parties, less freight, duty and
certain other adjustments specified in our collaboration agreement with Novartis, multiplied by our
share of the net revenue.
Product sales increased by 6% during the first quarter of 2011 compared to the same period of
the prior year. The increase was primarily attributed to higher contributions from product lines of
our acquired companies and APTIMA assay sales, offset by lower blood screening and research
products and services revenues.
Clinical Diagnostic Product Sales
Clinical diagnostic product sales, including assay, instrument, and ancillary sales,
represented $88.3 million, or 64% of product sales during the first quarter of 2011, compared to
$76.9 million, or 59% of product sales during the same period of the prior year. The $11.4 million
increase is primarily attributed to the addition of product sales from our acquired company, GTI
Diagnostics, an increase in product sales from infectious disease products, and increased APTIMA
sales.
Clinical diagnostic product sales were not materially affected by exchange rate impacts during
the first quarter of 2011 as compared to the same period in the prior year.
25
Blood Screening Product Sales
Blood screening product sales, including assay, instrument, and ancillary sales, represented
$46.7 million, or 34% of product sales during the first quarter of 2011, compared to $49.6 million,
or 38% of product sales during the same period of the prior year. The $2.9 million decrease is
primarily attributed to a decrease in the sale of blood screening-related instrumentation in the
current period.
Blood screening product sales were negatively affected by unfavorable estimated exchange rate
impacts of $0.3 million during the first quarter of 2011 as compared to the same period in the
prior year, primarily due to a stronger U.S. dollar versus the Euro.
Research Products and Services
We established an additional category of product sales as a result of our acquisition of
Tepnel in 2009, which we refer to as Research products and services. These sales represent
outsourcing services for the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and healthcare industries, including
nucleic acid purification and analysis services, as well as the sale of monoclonal antibodies.
These sales totaled $3.1 million during the first quarter of 2011, compared to $4.1 million during
the same period of the prior year. The $1.0 million decrease is primarily due to lower levels of
pharmaceutical service work performed in the current period.
Collaborative Research Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Collaborative research revenue |
|
$ |
3.6 |
|
|
$ |
3.3 |
|
|
$ |
0.3 |
|
|
|
9 |
% |
As a percent of total revenues |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We recognize collaborative research revenue over the term of various collaboration
agreements, as negotiated monthly contracted amounts are earned, in relative proportion to the
performance required under the contracts, or as reimbursable costs are incurred related to those
agreements. Non-refundable license fees are recognized over the related performance period or at
the time that we have satisfied all performance obligations. Milestone payments are recognized as
revenue upon the achievement of specified milestones.
The costs associated with collaborative research revenue are based on fully burdened full-time
equivalent rates and are reflected in our consolidated statements of income under the captions
Research and development, Marketing and sales and General and administrative, based on the
nature of the costs. We do not separately track all of the costs applicable to our collaborations
and, therefore, are not able to quantify all of the costs associated with collaborative research
revenue.
Collaborative research revenue increased 9% during the first quarter of 2011 compared to the
same period of the prior year. The $0.3 million increase was primarily due to increased
reimbursements from Novartis for shared development expenses attributable to the development of the
PANTHER instrument and product enhancements for use in the blood screening market.
Collaborative research revenue tends to fluctuate based on the type and amount of research
services performed, the status of projects under collaboration and the achievement of milestones.
Due to the nature of our collaborative research revenue, results in any one period are not
necessarily indicative of results to be achieved in the future. Our ability to generate additional
collaborative research revenue depends, in part, on our ability to initiate and maintain
relationships with potential and current collaborative partners and the advancement of related
collaborative research and development.
26
Royalty and License Revenue
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Royalty and license revenue |
|
$ |
1.4 |
|
|
$ |
1.6 |
|
|
$ |
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
-13 |
% |
As a percent of total revenues |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We recognize revenue for royalties due to us under license agreements with third parties upon
the manufacture, sale or use of our products or technologies. For those arrangements where
royalties are reasonably estimable, we recognize revenue based on estimates of royalties earned
during the applicable period and adjust for differences between the estimated and actual royalties.
Historically, these adjustments have not been material. For those arrangements where royalties are
not reasonably estimable, we recognize revenue upon receipt of royalty statements from the
applicable licensee. Non-refundable license fees are recognized over the related performance period
or at the time that we have satisfied all performance obligations.
Royalty and license revenue decreased by 13% during the first quarter of 2011 compared to the
same period of the prior year. The $0.2 million decrease was primarily a result of lower
collaboration royalties received from Novartis related to the plasma testing market.
Royalty and license revenue may fluctuate based on the nature of the related agreements and
the timing of receipt of license fees. Results in any one period are not necessarily indicative of
results to be achieved in the future. In addition, our ability to generate additional royalty and
license revenue will depend, in part, on our ability to market and commercialize our technologies.
Cost of Product Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Cost of product sales |
|
$ |
41.9 |
|
|
$ |
42.7 |
|
|
$ |
(0.8 |
) |
|
|
-2 |
% |
Gross profit margin as a percent of product sales |
|
|
70 |
% |
|
|
67 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product sales includes direct material, direct labor and manufacturing overhead
associated with the production of inventories. Cost of product sales may fluctuate significantly in
different periods based on changes in production volumes for both commercially approved products
and products under development or in clinical trials. Cost of product sales is also affected by
manufacturing efficiencies, allowances for scrap or expired material, additional costs related to
initial production quantities of new products after achieving FDA approval, instrument and software
amortization, and contractual adjustments, such as instrumentation costs, instrument service costs,
warranty costs and royalties. Cost of product sales excludes the amortization of
acquisition-related intangibles.
In addition, we manufacture significant quantities of materials, development lots, and
clinical trial lots of product prior to receiving approval from the FDA for commercial sale. The
majority of costs associated with development lots are classified as research and development, or
R&D, expense. The portion of a development lot that is manufactured for commercial sale is
capitalized to inventory and classified as cost of product sales upon shipment.
Cost of product sales decreased 2% during the first quarter of 2011 compared to the same
period in the prior year. The $0.8 million decrease was primarily due to lower instrumentation
sales and lower research products and services revenue. These lower costs were partially offset by
additional cost of product sales related to our acquired GTI Diagnostics business.
Our gross profit margin as a percentage of product sales increased to 70% during the first
quarter of 2011 from 67% during the same period in the prior year. The increase in gross profit
margin as a percentage of product sales was principally attributed to higher sales from our
infectious disease products and lower sales of lower margin instrumentation. The positive impact of
these factors was partially offset by an increase in test shipments as a proportion of our overall
share of blood screening revenues.
27
A portion of our blood screening revenues is attributable to sales of TIGRIS instruments to
Novartis, which totaled $2.0 million and $4.1 million during the first quarter of 2011 and 2010,
respectively. Under our collaboration agreement with Novartis, we sell TIGRIS instruments to them
at prices that approximate cost and share in profits of end-user sales in the United States. These
instrument sales, therefore, negatively impact our gross margin percentage in the periods when they
occur, but are a necessary precursor to increased sales of blood screening assays in the future.
Acquisition-related Intangible Amortization
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Acquisition-related
intangible amortization |
|
$ |
2.8 |
|
|
$ |
2.2 |
|
|
$ |
0.6 |
|
|
|
27 |
% |
As a percent of total revenues |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization expense related to our acquired intangible assets increased 27% during the
first quarter of 2011 as compared to the same period in the prior year. The $0.6 million increase
was attributable to an additional three months of amortization expense resulting from our
acquisition of GTI Diagnostics in December 2010. Our acquired intangible assets are amortized using
the straight-line method over their estimated useful lives, which range from 5 to 20 years.
Research and Development
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Research and development |
|
$ |
29.0 |
|
|
$ |
29.7 |
|
|
$ |
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
-2 |
% |
As a percent of total revenues |
|
|
20 |
% |
|
|
22 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We invest significantly in R&D as part of our ongoing efforts to develop new products and
technologies. Our R&D expenses include the development of proprietary products and instrument
platforms, as well as expenses related to the development of new products and technologies in
collaboration with our partners. R&D spending is dependent on the status of projects under
development and may vary substantially between quarterly or annual reporting periods.
R&D expenses decreased 2% during the first quarter of 2011 compared to the same period in the
prior year. The $0.7 million decrease was primarily related to a decline in development expenses
due to the wind-down of clinical trials for our HPV, PCA3, and Trichomonas assays during 2010,
partially offset by additional R&D expenses related to our acquired GTI Diagnostics business.
Marketing and Sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Marketing and sales |
|
$ |
16.5 |
|
|
$ |
14.8 |
|
|
$ |
1.7 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
As a percent of total revenues |
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our marketing and sales expenses include salaries and other personnel-related expenses,
promotional expenses, and fees for outside services.
Marketing and sales expenses increased 11% during the first quarter of 2011 compared to the
same period in the prior year. The $1.7 million increase is primarily attributed to an increase in
salaries, personnel-related expenses, and marketing activities due to our acquired GTI Diagnostics
business and continued investment in international expansion, primarily in Western Europe.
28
General and Administrative
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
General and administrative |
|
$ |
18.2 |
|
|
$ |
14.7 |
|
|
$ |
3.5 |
|
|
|
24 |
% |
As a percent of total revenues |
|
|
13 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our general and administrative, or G&A, expenses include expenses for finance, legal,
strategic planning and business development, public relations and human resources.
G&A expenses increased 24% during the first quarter of 2011 compared to the same period in the
prior year. The $3.5 million increase is primarily attributable to higher G&A costs associated with
the consolidation of our United Kingdom operations, our acquired GTI Diagnostics business, and
costs relating to litigation and patent prosecution.
Total Other Income, Net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Investment and interest income |
|
$ |
0.7 |
|
|
$ |
3.9 |
|
|
$ |
(3.2 |
) |
|
|
-82 |
% |
Interest expense |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
% |
Gain on contingent consideration |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
(1.7 |
) |
|
|
-100 |
% |
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
-200 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income, net |
|
$ |
0.4 |
|
|
$ |
4.9 |
|
|
$ |
(4.5 |
) |
|
|
-92 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other income, net, decreased 92% during the first quarter of 2011 compared to the
same period in the prior year. The $3.2 million decrease in investment and interest income is
primarily attributed to lower net realized gains on sales of marketable securities, decreased
interest income due to lower investment balances in 2011 as a result of the sale of investments to
fund our recent acquisitions, cash used for our stock repurchase program, and higher purchase
premium amortizations arising from increased market demand for tax-advantaged municipal bonds.
We recorded a non-cash gain of $1.7 million during the first quarter of 2010 as a result of a
reduction in the fair value of the contingent consideration liability related to our acquisition of
Prodesse. The fair value of the contingent consideration liability is $0 as of March 31, 2011
because we do not currently expect to make any further milestone payments related to our
acquisition of Prodesse. Future milestone payments, if any, will occur by the second quarter of
2012.
Income Tax Expense
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
% Change |
|
Income tax expense |
|
$ |
11.8 |
|
|
$ |
12.1 |
|
|
$ |
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
-2 |
% |
As a percent of income before tax |
|
|
34 |
% |
|
|
33 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our effective tax rate during the first quarter of 2011 increased as compared to the same
period in the prior year primarily due to contingent consideration adjustments in 2010 that are
generally not taxable.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Cash, cash equivalents and current marketable securities |
|
$ |
271.5 |
|
|
$ |
230.3 |
|
Working capital |
|
|
126.7 |
|
|
|
93.3 |
|
Current ratio |
|
|
1.4:1 |
|
|
|
1.3:1 |
|
Our working capital at March 31, 2011 increased $33.4 million from December 31, 2010.
This increase in working capital can be attributed primarily to an increase in cash and cash
equivalents during the quarter. During the
29
first quarter of 2011, we generated $40.1 million and
$12.8 million of cash from operating and investing activities, respectively. These increases were
offset by $19.5 million of cash used in financing activities.
The primary objectives of our investment policy are liquidity and safety of principal.
Consistent with these objectives, investments are made with the goal of achieving the highest rate
of return. The policy places emphasis on securities of high credit quality, with restrictions
placed on maturities and concentration by security type and issue.
Our marketable securities include equity securities, treasury securities, tax advantaged
municipal securities and FDIC insured corporate bonds with a minimum Moodys credit rating of A3 or
a Standard & Poors credit rating of A-. Our investment policy limits the effective maturity on
individual securities to six years and an average portfolio maturity to three years. At March 31,
2011, our portfolios had an average maturity of two years and an average credit quality of AA1 as
defined by Moodys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended March 31, |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
$ Change |
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Cash provided by (used in): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating activities |
|
$ |
40.1 |
|
|
$ |
40.7 |
|
|
$ |
(0.6 |
) |
Investing activities |
|
|
12.8 |
|
|
|
58.1 |
|
|
|
(45.3 |
) |
Financing activities |
|
|
(19.5 |
) |
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
Purchases of property, plant and equipment
(included in investing activities above) |
|
|
(10.8 |
) |
|
|
(7.8 |
) |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
Our primary source of liquidity has been cash from operations, which includes the collection
of accounts and other receivables related to product sales, collaborative research agreements, and
royalty and license fees. Additionally, our liquidity was enhanced in 2009 by our credit facility
with Bank of America, N.A., or Bank of America, described in Note 7 Borrowings, of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial
Statements included elsewhere in this report. Our primary short-term cash needs, which are subject
to change, include continued R&D spending to support new products, costs related to
commercialization of products and purchases of instrument systems for placement with our customers.
In addition, we may use cash for strategic purchases which may include the acquisition of
businesses and/or technologies complementary to our business and for stock repurchase programs.
Certain R&D costs may be funded under collaboration agreements with our collaboration partners.
Operating activities provided net cash of $40.1 million during the first quarter of 2011,
primarily from net income of $23.3 million and non-cash charges to net income of $16.8 million.
Non-cash charges primarily consisted of depreciation of $6.2 million, stock-based compensation
expense of $6.0 million and amortization of intangibles of $5.2 million.
Net cash provided by investing activities during the first quarter of 2011 was $12.8 million.
Cash provided during the first quarter of 2011 consisted primarily of $24.7 million in net proceeds
from the sale and maturities of marketable securities, offset by purchases of property, plant and
equipment of $10.8 million.
Net cash used in financing activities during the first quarter of 2011 was $19.5 million,
primarily driven by $48.0 million used to repurchase and retire approximately 756,000 shares of our
common stock under our 2011 stock repurchase program. This was offset by $17.4 million in proceeds
from the issuance of our common stock under stock option and employee stock purchase plans and
$10.0 million in additional borrowings under our credit facility.
We believe that our available cash balances, anticipated cash flows from operations, proceeds
from stock option exercises and borrowings under our credit facility will be sufficient to satisfy
our operating needs for the foreseeable future. However, we operate in a rapidly evolving and often
unpredictable business environment that may change the timing or amount of expected future cash
receipts and expenditures. Accordingly, we may in the future be required to raise additional funds
through the sale of equity or debt securities or from additional credit facilities. Additional
capital, if needed, may not be available on satisfactory terms, if at all. Further, debt financing
may subject us to covenants restricting our operations. Because our current credit facility is
secured by our marketable
30
debt securities, any significant needs for cash may cause us to liquidate some or all of our
marketable debt securities resulting in the need to partially or completely pay down, or refinance,
this indebtedness.
Contractual Obligations
We borrowed an additional $10.0 million under our revolving credit facility during the first
quarter of 2011. As a result, the total principal amount outstanding under our revolving credit
facility was $250.0 million as of March 31, 2011.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not currently have and have never had any relationships with unconsolidated entities or
financial partnerships, such as entities often referred to as structured finance or special purpose
entities, which would have been established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet
arrangements or other contractually narrow or limited purposes. In addition, we do not engage in
trading activities involving non-exchange traded contracts. As such, we are not materially exposed
to any financing, liquidity, market or credit risk that could arise if we had engaged in these
relationships.
Available Information
Copies of our public filings are available on our Internet website at http://www.gen-probe.com
as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it
to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Interest Rate Risk
Our exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates relates primarily to interest earned
on our investment portfolio and the amount of interest payable on our senior secured revolving
credit facility with Bank of America. As of March 31, 2011, the total principal amount outstanding
under the revolving credit facility was $250.0 million. At our option, loans accrue interest at a
per annum rate based on, either: the base rate (the base rate is defined as the greatest of (i) the
federal funds rate plus a margin equal to 0.50%, (ii) Bank of Americas prime rate and (iii) LIBOR
plus a margin equal to 1.00%); or LIBOR plus a margin equal to 0.60%, in each case for interest
periods of 1, 2, 3 or 6 months as selected by us. We do not believe that we are exposed to
significant interest rate risk with respect to our credit facility based on our option to select
the rate at which interest accrues under the credit facility, the short-term nature of the
borrowings and our ability to pay off the outstanding balance in a timely manner if the applicable
interest rate under the credit facility increases above the current interest rate yields on our
investment portfolio. A 100 basis point increase or decrease in interest rates would increase or
decrease our interest expense by approximately $2.5 million on an annual basis.
Our risk associated with fluctuating interest income is limited to our investments in interest
rate sensitive financial instruments. Under our current policies, we do not use interest rate
derivative instruments to manage this exposure to interest rate changes. We seek to ensure the
safety and preservation of our invested principal by limiting default risk, market risk, and
reinvestment risk. We mitigate default risk by investing in investment grade securities with an
average portfolio maturity of no more than three years. A 25 basis point increase or decrease in
interest rates would increase or decrease our current investment balance by approximately $2.0
million on an annual basis. While changes in interest rates may affect the fair value of our
investment portfolio, any gains or losses are not recognized in our consolidated statements of
income until the investment is sold or if a reduction in fair value is determined to be
other-than-temporary.
Foreign Currency Exchange Risk
Although the majority of our revenue is realized in U.S. dollars, some portions of our revenue
are realized in foreign currencies. As a result, our financial results could be affected by factors
such as changes in foreign currency exchange rates or weak economic conditions in foreign markets.
We translate the financial statements of our
31
non-U.S. operations using the end-of-period exchange rates for assets and liabilities and the
average exchange rates for each reporting period for results of operations. Net gains and losses
resulting from the translation of foreign financial statements and the effect of exchange rates in
intercompany receivables and payables of a long-term investment nature are recorded as a separate
component of stockholders equity under the caption Accumulated other comprehensive (loss)
income. These adjustments will affect net income upon the sale or liquidation of the underlying
investment.
Under our collaboration agreement with Novartis, a growing portion of blood screening product
sales is from western European countries. As a result, our international blood screening product
sales are affected by changes in the foreign currency exchange rates of those countries where
Novartis business is conducted in Euros or other local currencies. Based on international blood
screening product sales during the first quarter of 2011, a 10% movement of currency exchange
rates would result in a blood screening product sales increase or decrease of approximately $5.0
million annually. Similarly, a 10% movement of currency exchange rates would result in a clinical
diagnostic product sales increase or decrease of approximately $5.3 million annually. A 10%
movement of currency exchange rates would result in a research products and services sales increase
or decrease of approximately $1.4 million annually. The majority of our collaborative research
revenues and royalty and license revenues are denominated in U.S. dollars and, as such, are not
subject to exchange rate exposure. Our exposure for both blood screening and clinical diagnostic
product sales is primarily in the U.S. dollar versus the Euro, British pound, Australian dollar and
Canadian dollar.
Our total payables denominated in foreign currencies as of March 31, 2011 were not material.
Our receivables by currency as of March 31, 2011 reflected in U.S. dollar equivalents were as
follows (in millions):
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. dollar |
|
$ |
46.9 |
|
Euro |
|
|
7.6 |
|
British pound |
|
|
3.7 |
|
Canadian dollar |
|
|
1.5 |
|
Czech koruna |
|
|
0.2 |
|
Danish krone |
|
|
0.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross trade accounts receivable |
|
$ |
60.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
We maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that information
required to be disclosed in our current and periodic reports is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the SECs rules and forms, and that such information
is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. In
designing and evaluating the disclosure controls and procedures, management recognized that any
controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable and
not absolute assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. In reaching a reasonable level
of assurance, management was required to apply its judgment in evaluating the cost-benefit
relationship of possible controls and procedures.
In addition, the design of any system of controls is also based in part upon certain
assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design
will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions; over time,
controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with
policies or procedures may deteriorate. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective
control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
As of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, we carried out an
evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of
our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Based on this evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective as
of March 31, 2011.
32
An evaluation was also performed under the supervision and with the participation of our
management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of any change in our
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during our last fiscal quarter and that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over
financial reporting. That evaluation did not identify any change in our internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during our latest fiscal quarter and that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
A description of our material pending legal proceedings is disclosed in Note 9
Contingencies, of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements included elsewhere in this
report and is incorporated by reference herein. We are also engaged from time to time in other
legal actions arising in the ordinary course of our business and believe that the ultimate outcome
of these actions will not have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or
results of operations. However, due to the uncertainties inherent in litigation, no assurance can
be given as to the outcome of these proceedings. If any of these matters were resolved in a manner
unfavorable to us, our business, financial condition and results of operations would be harmed.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Set forth below and elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, and in other documents we
file with the SEC, are descriptions of risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to
differ materially from the results contemplated by the forward-looking statements contained in this
report. Because of the following factors, as well as other variables affecting our operating
results, past financial performance should not be considered a reliable indicator of future
performance and investors should not use historical trends to anticipate results or trends in
future periods. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Other
events that we do not currently anticipate or that we currently deem immaterial may also affect our
results of operations and financial condition. We have marked with an asterisk those risk factors
that reflect substantive changes from the risk factors included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2010.
Our quarterly revenue and operating results may vary significantly in future periods and our stock
price may decline.
Our operating results have fluctuated in the past and are likely to continue to do so in the
future. Our revenues are unpredictable and may fluctuate due to changes in demand for our products,
including fluctuations in demand for blood screening tests from our blood screening collaboration
partner Novartis, the timing of acquisitions, the execution of customer contracts, the receipt of
milestone payments, or the failure to achieve and receive the same, and the initiation or
termination of corporate collaboration agreements. In addition, a significant portion of our costs
can also vary substantially between quarterly or annual reporting periods. For example, the total
amount of research and development costs in a period often depends on the amount of costs we incur
in connection with manufacturing developmental lots and clinical trial lots. Moreover, a variety of
factors may affect our ability to make accurate forecasts regarding our operating results. For
example, certain of our products have a relatively limited sales history, which limits our ability
to accurately project future sales, prices and related sales cycles. In addition, we base our
internal projections of blood screening product sales and international sales of various diagnostic
products on projections prepared by our distributors of these products and therefore we are
dependent upon the accuracy of those projections. We expect continuing fluctuations in our
manufacture and shipment of blood screening products and instruments to Novartis, which vary each
period based on Novartis inventory levels and supply chain needs. In addition, our respiratory
infectious disease product line is subject to significant seasonal fluctuations. Because of all of
these factors, our operating results in one or more future quarters may fail to meet or exceed
financial guidance we may provide from time to time and the expectations of securities analysts or
investors, which could cause our stock price to decline. In addition, the trading market for our
common stock will be influenced by the research and reports that industry or securities analysts
publish about our business and that of our competitors. Furthermore, failure to achieve our
operational goals may inhibit our targeted growth plans and the successful implementation of our
strategic objectives.
33
Our financial performance may be adversely affected by current global economic conditions.
Our business depends on the overall demand for our products and on the economic health of our
current and prospective customers. Our projected revenues and operating results are based on
assumptions concerning certain levels of customer demand. Although these effects are difficult to
quantify, we believe that relative to our expectations we have experienced modest declines in
product sales growth rates in recent periods, due in part to current macroeconomic conditions and
pressures on healthcare utilization. A continued weakening of the global and domestic economies, or
a reduction in customer spending or credit availability, could result in downward pricing
pressures, delayed or decreased purchases of our products and longer sales cycles. Furthermore,
during challenging economic times our customers may face issues gaining timely access to sufficient
credit, which could result in an impairment of their ability to make timely payments to us. If that
were to occur, we may be required to increase our allowance for doubtful accounts. If economic and
market conditions in the United States or other key markets persist, spread, or deteriorate
further, we may experience adverse effects on our business, operating results and financial
condition.
We are dependent on Novartis and other third parties for the distribution of some of our products.
If any of our distributors terminates its relationship with us or fails to adequately perform, our
product sales will suffer.
We rely on Novartis to distribute blood screening products we manufacture. Commercial product
sales to Novartis accounted for 34% of our total product sales for the first three months of 2011
and 39% of our total product sales for 2010. In January 2009, we extended the term of our blood
screening collaboration with Novartis to June 30, 2025, subject to earlier termination under
certain limited circumstances specified in the collaboration agreement. In addition, we supply our
transcription-mediated amplification, or TMA, assay for the qualitative detection of HCV and
analyte specific reagents, or ASRs, for the quantitative detection of HCV to Siemens Healthcare
Diagnostics, Inc., or Siemens, pursuant to a collaboration agreement.
We rely upon bioMérieux S.A., or bioMérieux, for distribution of certain of our products in
most of Europe and Australia, Fujirebio, Inc., or Fujirebio, for distribution of certain of our
products in Japan, and various independent distributors for distribution of our products in other
regions. Distribution rights revert back to us upon termination of the distribution agreements. Our
distribution agreements with Fujirebio and bioMérieux expire in December 2012 and May 2012,
respectively, although each agreement may terminate earlier under certain circumstances.
If any of our distribution or marketing agreements is terminated, particularly our
collaboration agreement with Novartis, or if we elect to distribute new products directly, we will
have to invest in additional sales and marketing resources, including additional field sales
personnel, which would significantly increase future selling, general and administrative expenses.
We may not be able to enter into new distribution or marketing agreements on satisfactory terms, or
at all. If we fail to enter into acceptable distribution or marketing agreements or fail to
successfully market our products, our product sales will decrease.
If we cannot maintain our current corporate collaborations and enter into new corporate
collaborations, our product development could be delayed. In particular, any failure by us to
maintain our blood screening collaboration with Novartis would have a material adverse effect on
our business.
We rely, to a significant extent, on our corporate collaborators for funding development for
and marketing certain of our products. In addition, we expect to rely on our corporate
collaborators for the commercialization of certain products. If any of our corporate collaborators
were to breach or terminate its agreement with us or otherwise fail to conduct its collaborative
activities successfully and in a timely manner, the development or commercialization and subsequent
marketing of the products contemplated by the collaboration could be delayed or terminated. We
cannot control the amount and timing of resources our corporate collaborators devote to our
programs or potential products.
In June 2010, for example, we entered into a collaboration agreement with Pacific Biosciences
regarding the research and development of instruments integrating our sample preparation
technologies and Pacific Biosciences single-molecule DNA sequencing technologies for use in
clinical diagnostics. Subject to customary termination
34
rights, the initial term of the
collaboration will end on the earlier of December 15, 2012 and six months after Pacific Biosciences
demonstrates the proof of concept of its V2 single-molecule DNA sequencing system.
The continuation of any of our collaboration agreements depends on their periodic renewal by
us and our collaborators. For example, in January 2009 we extended the term of our blood screening
collaboration with Novartis to June 30, 2025, subject to earlier termination under certain limited
circumstances specified in the collaboration agreement. The collaboration was previously scheduled
to expire by its terms in 2013.
If any of our current collaboration agreements is terminated, or if we are unable to renew
those collaborations on acceptable terms, we would be required to devote additional internal
resources to product development or marketing or to terminate some development programs or seek
alternative corporate collaborations. We may not be able to negotiate additional corporate
collaborations on acceptable terms, if at all, and these collaborations may not be successful. In
addition, in the event of a dispute under our current or any future collaboration agreements, such
as those under our agreements with Novartis, Siemens and Pacific Biosciences, a court or arbitrator
may not rule in our favor and our rights or obligations under an agreement subject to a dispute may
be adversely affected, which may have an adverse effect on our business or operating results.
We may acquire other businesses or form collaborations, strategic alliances and joint ventures
that could decrease our profitability, result in dilution to stockholders or cause us to incur
debt or significant expense, and acquired companies or technologies could be difficult to
integrate and could disrupt our business.
As part of our business strategy, we intend to pursue acquisitions of complementary businesses
and enter into technology licensing arrangements. We also intend to pursue strategic alliances that
leverage our core technology and industry experience to expand our product offerings and geographic
presence. We have limited experience in acquiring other companies. Any future acquisitions by us
could result in large and immediate write-offs or the incurrence of debt and contingent
liabilities, any of which could harm our operating results. Integration of an acquired company may
also require management resources that otherwise would be available for ongoing development of our
existing business. We may not identify or complete these transactions in a timely manner, on a
cost-effective basis, or at all.
In April 2009, we acquired Tepnel, which we believe provides us with access to growth
opportunities in transplant diagnostics, genetic testing and pharmaceutical services, as well as
accelerates our ongoing strategic efforts to strengthen our marketing and sales, distribution and
manufacturing capabilities in Europe. In October 2009 we acquired Prodesse, which we believe
supports our strategic focus on commercializing differentiated molecular tests for infectious
diseases. In addition, in December 2010, we acquired GTI Diagnostics, which we believe will
strengthen our transplant diagnostics business, and provide us access to the specialty coagulation
and transfusion-related blood bank markets. Our beliefs regarding the merits of these acquisitions
are based upon numerous assumptions that are subject to risks and uncertainties that could deviate
materially from our expectations, and could adversely affect our operating results.
Managing the acquisitions of Tepnel, Prodesse and GTI Diagnostics, as well as any other future
acquisitions, will entail numerous operational and financial risks, including:
|
|
|
the anticipated financial performance and estimated cost savings and other synergies as
a result of the acquisitions may not materialize; |
|
|
|
|
the inability to retain or replace key employees of any acquired businesses or hire
enough qualified personnel to staff any new or expanded operations; |
|
|
|
|
the impairment of relationships with key customers of acquired businesses due to
changes in management and ownership of the acquired businesses; |
|
|
|
|
the exposure to federal, state, local and foreign tax liabilities in connection with
any acquisition or the integration of any acquired businesses; |
|
|
|
|
the exposure to unknown liabilities; |
35
|
|
|
higher than expected acquisition and integration costs that could cause our quarterly
and annual operating results to fluctuate; |
|
|
|
|
increased amortization expenses if an acquisition includes significant intangible
assets; |
|
|
|
|
combining the operations and personnel of acquired businesses with our own, which could
be difficult and costly; |
|
|
|
|
the risk of entering new markets; and |
|
|
|
|
integrating, or completing the development and application of, any acquired
technologies and personnel with diverse business and cultural backgrounds, which could
disrupt our business and divert our managements time and attention. |
To finance any acquisitions, we may choose to issue shares of our common stock as
consideration, which would result in dilution to our stockholders. If the price of our equity is
low or volatile, we may not be able to use our common stock as consideration to acquire other
companies. Alternatively, it may be necessary for us to raise additional funds through public or
private financings. Additional funds may not be available on terms that are favorable to us, or at
all.
Our future success will depend in part upon our ability to enhance existing products and to
develop, introduce and commercialize new products.
The markets for our products are characterized by rapidly changing technology, evolving
industry standards and new product introductions, which may make our existing products obsolete.
Our future success will depend in part upon our ability to enhance existing products and to develop
and introduce new products. We believe that we will need to continue to provide new products that
can detect and quantify a greater number of organisms from a single sample. We also believe that we
must develop new assays that can be performed on automated instrument platforms. The development of
new instrument platforms, if any, in turn may require the modification of existing assays for use
with the new instrument, and additional time-consuming and costly regulatory approvals. For
example, our failure to successfully develop and commercialize our PANTHER instrument system, or
our failure to modify existing assays or develop new assays for use with the PANTHER instrument
system on a timely basis could have a negative impact on our financial performance.
The development of new or enhanced products is a complex and uncertain process requiring the
accurate anticipation of technological, market and medical practice trends, as well as precise
technological execution. In addition, the successful development of new products will depend on the
development of new technologies. We may be required to undertake time-consuming and costly
development activities and to seek regulatory approval for these new products. We may experience
difficulties that could delay or prevent the successful development, introduction and marketing of
these new products. We have experienced delays in receiving FDA clearance in the past. Regulatory
clearance or approval of any new products we may develop, such as our APTIMA HPV and PROGENSA PCA3
assays, may not be granted by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities on a timely basis, or at
all, and these and other new products may not be successfully commercialized. Failure to timely
achieve regulatory approval for our products and introduce products to market could negatively
affect our growth objectives and financial performance.
We face intense competition, and our failure to compete effectively could decrease our revenues
and harm our profitability and results of operations.
The clinical diagnostics industry is highly competitive. Currently, the majority of diagnostic
tests used by physicians and other health care providers are performed by large reference, public
health and hospital laboratories. We expect that these laboratories will compete vigorously to
maintain their dominance in the diagnostic testing market. In order to achieve market acceptance of
our products, we will be required to demonstrate that our products provide accurate, cost-effective
and time saving alternatives to tests performed by traditional laboratory procedures and products
made by our competitors.
36
In the markets for clinical diagnostic products, a number of competitors, including F.
Hoffman-La Roche Ltd. and its affiliate Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., which we refer to
collectively as Roche, Abbott Laboratories, through its subsidiary Abbott Molecular Inc., which we
refer to collectively as Abbott, BD, Siemens, QIAGEN N.V., One Lambda, Inc., bioMérieux, and
Hologic Inc., currently compete with us for product sales, primarily on the basis of technology,
quality, reputation, accuracy, ease of use, price, reliability, the timing of new product
introductions and product line offerings. Our existing competitors or new market entrants may be in
better position than we are to respond quickly to new or emerging technologies, may be able to
undertake more extensive marketing campaigns, may adopt more aggressive pricing policies and may be
more successful in attracting potential customers, employees and strategic partners. Many of our
competitors have, and in the future these and other competitors may have, significantly greater
financial, marketing, sales, manufacturing, distribution and technological resources than we do.
Moreover, these companies may have substantially greater expertise in conducting clinical trials
and research and development, greater ability to obtain necessary intellectual property licenses
and greater brand recognition than we do, any of which may adversely affect our customer retention
and market share.
Competitors may make rapid technological developments that may result in our technologies and
products becoming obsolete before we recover the expenses incurred to develop them or before they
generate significant revenue or market acceptance. Some of our competitors have developed real
time or kinetic nucleic acid assays and semi-automated instrument systems for those assays.
Additionally, some of our competitors are developing assays that permit the quantitative detection
of multiple analytes (or quantitative multiplexing). Although we are evaluating and/or developing
such technologies, we believe some of our competitors are further along in the development process
than we are with respect to such assays and instrumentation.
In the market for blood screening products, the primary competitor to our collaboration with
Novartis is Roche, which received FDA approval of its PCR-based NAT tests for blood screening in
December 2002 and received FDA approval of a multiplex real-time PCR assay to screen donated blood
in December 2008. Our collaboration with Novartis also competes with blood banks and laboratories
that have internally developed assays based on PCR technology, Ortho-Clinical Diagnostics, Inc., a
subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson that markets an HCV antigen assay, and Abbott and Siemens with
respect to immunoassay products. In the future, our collaboration blood screening products also may
compete with viral inactivation or reduction technologies and blood substitutes.
We believe the global blood screening market is maturing rapidly. We believe the competitive
position of our blood screening collaboration with Novartis in the United States remains strong.
However, outside of the United States, blood screening testing volume is generally more
decentralized than in the United States, customer contracts typically turn over more rapidly and
the number of new countries yet to adopt nucleic acid testing for blood screening is diminishing.
As a result, we believe geographic expansion opportunities for our blood screening collaboration
with Novartis may be narrowing and that we will face increasing price competition within the
nucleic acid blood screening market.
Novartis also retains certain rights to grant licenses of the patents related to HCV and HIV
to third parties in blood screening using NAT. Prior to its merger with Novartis, Chiron granted
HIV and HCV licenses to Roche in the blood screening and clinical diagnostics fields. Chiron also
granted HIV and HCV licenses in the clinical diagnostics field to Bayer Healthcare LLC (now
Siemens), together with the right to grant certain additional HIV and HCV sublicenses in the field
to third parties. We believe Bayers rights have now been assigned to Siemens as part of Bayers
December 2006 sale of its diagnostics business. Chiron also granted an HCV license to Abbott and an
HIV license to Organon Teknika (now bioMérieux) in the clinical diagnostics field. If Novartis
grants additional licenses in blood screening or Siemens grants additional licenses in clinical
diagnostics, further competition will be created for sales of HCV and HIV assays and these licenses
could affect the prices that can be charged for our products.
37
Failure to manufacture our products in accordance with product specifications could result in
increased costs, lost revenues, customer dissatisfaction or voluntary product recalls, any of
which could harm our profitability and commercial reputation.
Properly manufacturing our complex nucleic acid products requires precise technological
execution and strict compliance with regulatory requirements. We may experience problems in the
manufacturing process for a number of reasons, such as equipment malfunction or failure to follow
specific protocols. If problems arise during the production of a particular product lot, that
product lot may need to be discarded or destroyed. This could, among other things, result in
increased costs, lost revenues and customer dissatisfaction. If problems are not discovered before
the product lot is released to the market, we may incur recall and product liability costs. In the
past, we have voluntarily recalled certain product lots for failure to meet product specifications.
Any failure to manufacture our products in accordance with product specifications could have a
material adverse effect on our revenues, profitability and commercial reputation.
Disruptions in the supply of raw materials and consumable goods or issues associated with their
quality from our single source suppliers, including Roche Molecular Biochemicals, which is an
affiliate of one of our primary competitors, could result in a significant disruption in sales and
profitability.
We purchase some key raw materials and consumable goods used in the manufacture of our
products from single-source suppliers. If we cannot obtain sufficient raw materials from our key
suppliers, production of our own products may be delayed or disrupted. In addition, we may not be
able to obtain supplies from replacement suppliers on a timely or cost-effective basis, or at all.
A reduction or stoppage in supply while we seek a replacement supplier would limit our ability to
manufacture our products, which could result in a significant reduction in sales and profitability.
In addition, an impurity or variation from specification in any raw material we receive could
significantly delay our ability to manufacture products. Our inventories may not be adequate to
meet our production needs during any prolonged supply interruption. We also have single source
suppliers for proposed future products. Failure to maintain existing supply relationships or to
obtain suppliers for our future products on commercially reasonable terms would prevent us from
manufacturing our products and limit our growth.
Our current supplier of certain key raw materials for our amplified NAT assays, pursuant to a
fixed-price contract, is Roche Molecular Biochemicals. We have a supply and purchase agreement for
oligonucleotides for HPV with Roche Molecular Systems. Each of these entities is an affiliate of
Roche Diagnostics GmbH, one of our primary competitors.
We have only one third-party manufacturer for each of our instrument product lines, which exposes
us to increased risks associated with production delays, delivery schedules, manufacturing
capability, quality control, quality assurance and costs.
We have one third-party manufacturer for each of our instrument product lines. KMC Systems,
Inc., or KMC Systems, is the only manufacturer of our TIGRIS instrument; MGM Instruments, Inc., or
MGM Instruments, is the only manufacturer of our LEADER series of luminometers; and Stratec
Biomedical Systems AG, or Stratec, is the only manufacturer of our PANTHER instrument system. We
are dependent on these third-party manufacturers, and this dependence exposes us to increased risks
associated with production delays, delivery schedules, manufacturing capability, quality control,
quality assurance and costs.
We have no firm long-term commitments from KMC Systems to supply
products to us for any specific period, or in any specific quantity, except as may be provided in a
particular purchase order. If KMC Systems, MGM Instruments, Stratec or any of our other third-party
manufacturers experiences delays, disruptions, capacity constraints or quality control problems in
its development or manufacturing operations or becomes insolvent or otherwise fails to supply us
with products in sufficient quantities, then instrument shipments to our customers could be
delayed, which would decrease our revenues and harm our competitive position and reputation.
Further, because we place orders with our manufacturers based on forecasts of expected demand for
our instruments, if we inaccurately forecast demand we may be unable to obtain adequate
manufacturing capacity or adequate quantities of components to meet our customers delivery
requirements, or we may accumulate excess inventories.
38
We may in the future need to find new contract manufacturers to replace existing suppliers,
increase our volumes or reduce our costs. We may not be able to find contract manufacturers that
meet our needs, and even if we do, qualifying a new contract manufacturer and commencing volume
production is expensive and time consuming. For example, we believe qualifying a new manufacturer
of our TIGRIS instrument would take approximately 12 months and require regulatory approvals. If we
are required or elect to change contract manufacturers, we may lose revenues and our customer
relationships may suffer.
We and our customers are subject to various governmental regulations, and we may incur significant
expenses to comply with, and experience delays in commercializing, or be unable to commercialize,
our products as a result of, these regulations.
The clinical diagnostic and blood screening products we design, develop, manufacture and
market are subject to rigorous regulation by the FDA and numerous other federal, state and foreign
governmental authorities. We generally are prohibited from marketing our clinical diagnostic
products in the United States unless we obtain either 510(k) clearance or premarket approval from
the FDA. In August 2010, the FDAs Center for Devices and Radiological Health, or CDRH, issued two
reports outlining potential changes to the 510(k) regulatory process. In addition, in January 2011,
the CDRH issued an implementation plan containing 25 specific actions to be implemented in 2011
relating to the 510(k) regulatory process and associated administrative matters. The CDRH also
deferred action on several other initiatives, including the creation of a new class of devices that
would be subject to heightened review processes, until the Institute of Medicine issues a related
report on the 510(k) regulatory process, which is expected to be released in the summer of 2011.
Many of the actions proposed by the CDRH could result in significant changes to the 510(k) process,
which would likely complicate the process of getting products cleared by the FDA. Delays in receipt
of, or failure to obtain, clearances or approvals for future products could delay or preclude
realization of product revenues from new products or result in substantial additional costs which
could decrease our profitability.
Outside the United States, our ability to market our products is contingent upon maintaining
our certification with the International Organization for Standardization, and in some cases
receiving specific marketing authorization from the appropriate foreign regulatory authorities. The
requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, marketing authorization, pricing and
reimbursement vary widely from country to country. Our EU foreign marketing authorizations cover
all member states. Foreign registration is an ongoing process as we register additional products
and/or product modifications.
The process of seeking and obtaining regulatory approvals, particularly from the FDA and some
foreign governmental authorities, to market our products can be costly and time consuming, and
approvals might not be granted for future products on a timely basis, if at all. In addition,
unexpected complications in conducting trials could cause us to incur unanticipated expenses or
result in delays or difficulties in receiving FDA approval. For example, when we started the U.S.
clinical trial for our investigational APTIMA HPV assay we originally expected that we would enroll
and test approximately 7,000 women. However, we actually enrolled approximately 13,000 women in the
trial based on the actual prevalence of cervical disease observed. Although we submitted a PMA to
the FDA for our investigational APTIMA HPV assay on the TIGRIS system in the fourth quarter of
2010, we cannot provide any assurances that the FDA will ultimately approve the use of our APTIMA
HPV assay. We have also recently submitted applications to the FDA for clearance or approval of a
number of other assays, including our PROGENSA PCA3 assay. There can be no assurance that any of
these assays will be approved for sale in the United States on a timeline consistent with our
expectations, or at all. Failure to obtain or delay in obtaining FDA approval of any of our newly
developed assays could have a material adverse effect on our financial performance.
We are also required to continue to comply with applicable FDA and other regulatory
requirements once we have obtained clearance or approval for a product. These requirements include,
among other things, the Quality System Regulation, labeling requirements, the FDAs general
prohibition against promoting products for unapproved or off-label uses and adverse event
reporting regulations. Failure to comply with applicable FDA product regulatory requirements could
result in, among other things, warning letters, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, repairs,
replacements, refunds, recalls or seizures of products, total or partial suspension of production,
the FDAs refusal to grant future premarket clearances or approvals, withdrawals or suspensions of
current product applications and criminal prosecution. Any of these actions, in combination or
alone, could prevent us from selling our products and harm our business.
39
Certain assay reagents may be sold in the United States as ASRs without 510(k) clearance or
premarket approval from the FDA. However, the FDA restricts the sale of these ASR products to
clinical laboratories certified to perform high complexity testing under the Clinical Laboratory
Improvement Amendments, or CLIA, and also restricts the types of products that can be sold as ASRs.
In addition, each laboratory must validate the ASR product for use in diagnostic procedures as a
laboratory developed test. We currently offer several ASR products including ASRs for use in the
detection of PCA3 mRNA and for use in the detection of the parasite Trichomonas vaginalis. We also
have developed an ASR for quantitative HCV testing that Siemens provides to Quest Diagnostics
Incorporated. In September 2007, the FDA published guidance that defines the types of products that
can be sold as ASRs. Under the terms of this guidance and the ASR Manufacturer Letter issued in
June 2008 by the Office of In Vitro Diagnostic Device Evaluation and Safety at the FDA, it may be
more challenging for us to market some of our ASR products and we may be required to terminate
those ASR product sales, conduct clinical studies and make submissions of our ASR products to the
FDA for clearance or approval.
The use of our diagnostic products is also affected by CLIA and related federal and state
regulations governing laboratory testing. CLIA is intended to ensure the quality and reliability of
clinical laboratories in the United States by mandating specific standards in the areas of
personnel qualifications, administration, participation in proficiency testing, patient test
management, quality and inspections. Current or future CLIA requirements or the promulgation of
additional regulations affecting laboratory testing may prevent some clinical laboratories from
using some or all of our diagnostic products.
As both the FDA and foreign government regulators have become increasingly stringent, we may
be subject to more rigorous regulation by governmental authorities in the future. Complying with
these rules and regulations could cause us to incur significant additional expenses and delays in
launching products, which would harm our operating results.
Our products are subject to recalls even after receiving FDA approval or clearance.*
The FDA and governmental bodies in other countries have the authority to require the recall of
our products if we fail to comply with relevant regulations pertaining to product manufacturing,
quality, labeling, advertising, or promotional activities, or if new information is obtained
concerning the safety of a product. Our assay products incorporate complex biochemical reagents and
our instruments comprise complex hardware and software. We have in the past voluntarily recalled
products, which, in each case, required us to identify a problem and correct it. In December 2008,
we recalled certain AccuProbe test kits after receiving a customer complaint indicating the
customer had received a kit containing a probe reagent tube that appeared upon visual inspection to
be empty. We confirmed that a manufacturing error had occurred, corrected the problem, recalled all
potentially affected products, provided replacements and notified the FDA and other appropriate
authorities. In March 2011, we received a letter from the FDA classifying our December 2008
voluntary recall as a Class 1 recall, the most serious of the recall classifications used by the
FDA.
Although none of our past product recalls had a material adverse effect on our business, our
products may be subject to a future government-mandated recall or a voluntary recall, and any such
recall could divert managerial and financial resources, could be more difficult and costly to
correct, could result in the suspension of sales of our products and could harm our financial
results and our reputation.
Our gross profit margin percentage on the sale of blood screening assays will decrease upon the
implementation of smaller pool size testing.
We currently receive revenues from the sale of blood screening assays primarily for use with
pooled donor samples. In pooled testing, multiple donor samples are initially screened by a single
test. Since Novartis sells blood screening assays under our collaboration to blood screening
centers on a per donation basis, our profit margins are greater when a single test can be used to
screen multiple donor samples.
We believe certain blood screening markets are trending from pooled testing of large numbers
of donor samples to smaller pool sizes. A greater number of tests will be required in markets where
smaller pool sizes are required. Under our amended and restated collaboration agreement with
Novartis, we bear half of the cost of manufacturing blood screening assays. The greater number of
tests required for smaller pool sizes will increase our variable
40
manufacturing costs, including costs of raw materials and labor. If the price per donor or
total sales volume does not increase in line with the increase in our total variable manufacturing
costs, our gross profit margin percentage from sales of blood screening assays will decrease upon
adoption of smaller pool sizes. We have already observed this trend with respect to certain sales
internationally. We are not able to predict accurately the ultimate extent to which our gross
profit margin percentage will be negatively affected as a result of smaller pool sizes, because we
do not know the ultimate selling price that Novartis may charge to the end user or the degree to
which smaller pool size testing will be adopted across the markets in which our products are sold.
Because we depend on a small number of customers for a significant portion of our product sales,
the loss of any of these customers or any cancellation or delay of a large purchase by any of
these customers could significantly reduce our revenues.
Historically, a limited number of customers have accounted for a significant portion of our
product sales, and we do not have any long-term commitments with these customers, other than our
collaboration agreement with Novartis. Product sales from our blood screening collaboration with
Novartis accounted for 34% of our total product sales for the three months ended March 31, 2011 and
39% of our total product sales for 2010. Our blood screening collaboration with Novartis is largely
dependent on three large customers in the United States, The American Red Cross, Americas Blood
Centers and Creative Testing Solutions, although we do not receive any revenues directly from those
entities. Novartis was our only customer that accounted for greater than 10% of total revenues
during both the first three months of 2011 and 2010. However, various state and city public health
agencies accounted for an aggregate of 7% of our total revenues for both the first three months of
2011 and 2010. Although state and city public health agencies are legally independent of each
other, we believe they tend to act similarly with respect to their product purchasing decisions. We
anticipate that our operating results will continue to depend to a significant extent upon revenues
from a small number of customers. The loss of any of our key customers, or a significant reduction
in sales volume or pricing to those customers, could significantly reduce our revenues.
Intellectual property rights on which we rely to protect the technologies underlying our products
may be inadequate to prevent third parties from using our technologies or developing competing
products.
Our success will depend in part on our ability to obtain patent protection for, or maintain
the secrecy of, our proprietary products, processes and other technologies for the development of
blood screening and clinical diagnostic products and instruments. Although we had more than 550
U.S. and foreign patents covering our products and technologies as of March 31, 2011, these
patents, or any patents that we may own or license in the future, may not afford meaningful
protection for our technology and products. The pursuit and assertion of a patent right,
particularly in areas like nucleic acid diagnostics and biotechnology, involve complex
determinations and, therefore, are characterized by substantial uncertainty. In addition, the laws
governing patentability and the scope of patent coverage continue to evolve, particularly in
biotechnology. As a result, patents might not issue from certain of our patent applications or from
applications licensed to us. Our existing patents will expire by April 28, 2029 and the patents we
may obtain in the future also will expire over time.
The scope of any of our issued patents may not be broad enough to offer meaningful protection.
In addition, others may challenge our current patents or patents we may obtain in the future and,
as a result, these patents could be narrowed, invalidated or rendered unenforceable, or we may be
forced to stop using the technology covered by these patents or to license technology from third
parties.
The laws of some foreign countries may not protect our proprietary rights to the same extent
as do the laws of the United States. Any patents issued to us or our collaborators may not provide
us with any competitive advantages, and the patents held by other parties may limit our freedom to
conduct our business or use our technologies. Our efforts to enforce and maintain our intellectual
property rights may not be successful and may result in substantial costs and diversion of
management time. Even if our rights are valid, enforceable and broad in scope, third parties may
develop competing products based on technology that is not covered by our patents.
In addition to patent protection, we also rely on copyright and trademark protection, trade
secrets, know-how, continued technological innovation and licensing opportunities. In an effort to
maintain the confidentiality and ownership of our trade secrets and proprietary information, we
require our employees, consultants, advisors and others to whom we disclose confidential
information to execute confidentiality and proprietary information and
41
inventions agreements. However, it is possible that these agreements may be breached,
invalidated or rendered unenforceable, and if so, adequate corrective remedies may not be
available. Furthermore, like many companies in our industry, we may from time to time hire
scientific personnel formerly employed by other companies involved in one or more areas similar to
the activities we conduct. In some situations, our confidentiality and proprietary information and
inventions agreements may conflict with, or be subject to, the rights of third parties with whom
our employees, consultants or advisors have prior employment or consulting relationships. Although
we require our employees and consultants to maintain the confidentiality of all confidential
information of previous employers, we or these individuals may be subject to allegations of trade
secret misappropriation or other similar claims as a result of their prior affiliations. Finally,
others may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques,
or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets. Our failure to protect our proprietary information
and techniques may inhibit or limit our ability to exclude certain competitors from the market and
execute our business strategies.
The diagnostic products industry has a history of patent and other intellectual property
litigation, and we have been and may continue to be involved in costly intellectual property
lawsuits.
The diagnostic products industry has a history of patent and other intellectual property
litigation, and these lawsuits likely will continue. From time-to-time in the ordinary course of
business, we receive communications from third parties calling our attention to patents or other
intellectual property rights owned by them, with the implicit or explicit suggestion that we may
need to acquire a license of such rights. We have faced in the past, and may face in the future,
patent infringement lawsuits by companies that control patents for products and services similar to
ours or other lawsuits alleging infringement by us of their intellectual property rights. In order
to protect or enforce our intellectual property rights, we may choose to initiate legal proceedings
against third parties. Legal proceedings relating to intellectual property typically are expensive,
take significant time and divert managements attention from other business concerns. The cost of
such litigation could adversely affect our results of operations, making us less profitable.
Further, if we do not prevail in an infringement lawsuit brought against us, we might have to pay
substantial damages, including treble damages, and we could be required to stop the infringing
activity or obtain a license to use the patented technology.
In October 2009, we filed a patent infringement action against BD in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of California. The complaint alleges that BDs
Vipertm XTRtm testing system infringes five of our U.S.
patents covering automated processes for preparing, amplifying and detecting nucleic acid targets.
The complaint also alleges that BDs ProbeTectm Female Endocervical and Male
Urethral Specimen Collection Kits for Amplified Chlamydia trachomatis/Neisseria gonorrhoeae (CT/GC)
DNA assays used with the Viper XTR testing system infringe two of our U.S. patents covering
penetrable caps for specimen collection tubes. The complaint seeks monetary damages and injunctive
relief. In March 2010, we filed a second complaint for patent infringement against BD in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of California alleging that BDs BD MAX
Systemtm (formerly known as the HandyLab Jaguar system) infringes four of our
U.S. patents covering automated processes for preparing, amplifying and detecting nucleic acid
targets. The second complaint also seeks monetary damages and injunctive relief. In June 2010,
these two actions were consolidated into a single legal proceeding. There can be no assurances as
to the final outcome of this litigation.
Pursuant to our collaboration agreement with Novartis, we hold certain rights in the blood
screening and clinical diagnostics fields under patents originally issued to Novartis covering the
detection of HIV. We sell a qualitative HIV test in the clinical diagnostics field and we
manufacture tests for HIV for use in the blood screening field, which Novartis sells under
Novartis brands and name. In February 2005, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office declared two
interferences related to U.S. Patent No. 6,531,276 (Methods For Detecting Human Immunodeficiency
Virus Nucleic Acid), originally issued to Novartis. The first interference was between Novartis
and the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, and pertained to U.S. Patent Application No.
06/693,866 (Cloning and Expression of HTLV-III DNA). The second interference was between Novartis
and Institut Pasteur, and pertained to Institut Pasteurs U.S. Patent Application No. 07/999,410
(Cloned DNA Sequences, Hybridizable with Genomic RNA of Lymphadenopathy-Associated Virus (LAV)).
We were informed that the Patent and Trademark Office determined that Institut Pasteur invented the
subject matter at issue prior to NIH and Novartis. We were also informed that Novartis and NIH
subsequently filed actions in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia challenging the
decisions of the Patent and Trademark Office in the patent interference cases. From November 2007
through September 2008, the parties engaged in settlement negotiations and then notified the court
that they had signed a memorandum of understanding prior to the negotiation of final, definitive
settlement documents. In May 2008, we
42
signed a license agreement with Institut Pasteur concerning Institut Pasteurs intellectual
property for the molecular detection of HIV, covering products manufactured and sold through, and
under, our brands or name. In September 2008, the parties to the pending litigation in the U.S.
District Court for the District of Columbia informed the court that they were unable to reach a
final, definitive agreement and intended to proceed with litigation. There can be no assurances as
to the ultimate outcome of the interference litigation and no assurances as to how the outcome of
the interference litigation may affect the patent rights we licensed from Institut Pasteur, or
Novartis right to sell HIV blood screening tests.
The U.S. health care reform law could adversely affect our business, profitability and stock
price.
Comprehensive health care reform legislation has been signed into law in the United States.
Although we cannot fully predict the many ways that health care reform might affect our business,
the law imposes a 2.3% excise tax on certain transactions, including many U.S. sales of medical
devices, which we expect will include U.S. sales of our assays and instruments. This tax is
scheduled to take effect in 2013. It is unclear whether and to what extent, if at all, other
anticipated developments resulting from health care reform, such as an increase in the number of
people with health insurance and an increased focus on preventive medicine, may provide us
additional revenue to offset this increased tax. If additional revenue does not materialize, or if
our efforts to offset the excise tax through price increases, spending cuts or other actions are
unsuccessful, the increased tax burden would adversely affect our financial performance, which in
turn could cause the price of our stock to decline.
Our indebtedness could adversely affect our financial health.
In February 2009, we entered into a credit agreement with Bank of America which provided for a
one-year senior secured revolving credit facility in an amount of up to $180.0 million that is
subject to a borrowing base formula. Subject to the terms of the credit agreement, including the
amount of funds that we are permitted to borrow from time to time under the credit agreement, the
revolving credit facility has a sub-limit for the issuance of letters of credit in a face amount of
up to $10.0 million. In March 2009, we and Bank of America amended the credit facility to increase
the amount which we may borrow from time to time under the credit agreement from $180.0 million to
$250.0 million. As of March 31, 2011, the total principal amount outstanding under the revolving
credit facility was $250.0 million. The term of our credit facility with Bank of America has been
extended twice and currently expires in February 2012.
Our indebtedness could have important consequences. For example, it could:
|
|
|
increase our vulnerability to general adverse economic and industry conditions; |
|
|
|
|
have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition if we are unable
to service our indebtedness or refinance such indebtedness; |
|
|
|
|
limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our business and the
industry in which we operate; |
|
|
|
|
place us at a disadvantage compared to our competitors that have less indebtedness; and |
|
|
|
|
expose us to higher interest expense in the event of increases in interest rates
because indebtedness under our credit facility bears interest at a variable rate. |
In addition, we must comply with certain affirmative and negative covenants under the credit
agreement, including covenants that limit or restrict our ability to, among other things, merge or
consolidate, change our business, and permit the borrowings to exceed a specified borrowing base,
subject to certain exceptions as set forth in the credit agreement. If we default under the senior
secured credit facility, because of a covenant breach or otherwise, the outstanding amounts
thereunder could become immediately due and payable.
We may be subject to future product liability claims that may exceed the scope and amount of our
insurance coverage, which would expose us to liability for uninsured claims.
While there is a federal preemption defense against product liability claims for medical
products that receive premarket approval from the FDA, such defense may not be available for
products that we market under a 510(k) clearance. As such, we are subject to potential product
liability claims as a result of the design, development,
43
manufacture and marketing of our clinical diagnostic products. Any product liability claim
brought against us, with or without merit, could result in an increase of our product liability
insurance rates. In addition, our insurance policies have various exclusions, and thus we may be
subject to a product liability claim for which we have no insurance coverage, in which case we may
have to pay the entire amount of any award. In addition, insurance varies in cost and can be
difficult to obtain, and we may not be able to obtain insurance in the future on terms acceptable
to us, or at all. A successful product liability claim brought against us in excess of our
insurance coverage, or which our insurance policies do not cover, may require us to pay substantial
amounts, which could harm our business and results of operations.
We are exposed to risks associated with acquisitions and other long-lived and intangible assets
that may become impaired and result in an impairment charge.
As of March 31, 2011, we had approximately $521.3 million of long-lived assets, including
$14.0 million of capitalized software, net of accumulated amortization, relating primarily to our
TIGRIS and PANTHER instruments, goodwill of $150.6 million, a $5.4 million investment in Qualigen,
Inc., a $5.0 million investment in DiagnoCure, Inc., a $0.7 million investment in Roka Bioscience, Inc., and
$182.1 million of capitalized licenses and manufacturing access fees, patents, purchased intangible
assets and other long-term assets. Additionally, we had $69.2 million of land and buildings, $23.6
million of building improvements, $66.9 million of equipment and furniture and fixtures and $3.8
million in construction in progress. The substantial majority of our long-lived assets are located
in the United States. The carrying amounts of long-lived and intangible assets are affected
whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of any asset may not
be recoverable.
These events or changes might include a significant decline in market share, a significant
decline in profits, rapid changes in technology, significant litigation, an inability to
successfully deliver an instrument to the marketplace and attain customer acceptance or other
matters. Adverse events or changes in circumstances may affect the estimated undiscounted future
operating cash flows expected to be derived from long-lived and intangible assets. If at any time
we determine that an impairment has occurred, we will be required to reflect the impaired value as
a charge, resulting in a reduction in earnings in the quarter such impairment is identified and a
corresponding reduction in our net asset value. In the past we have incurred, and in the future we
may incur, impairment charges. A material reduction in earnings resulting from such a charge could
cause us to fail to meet the expectations of investors and securities analysts, which could cause
the price of our stock to decline.
Future changes in financial accounting standards or practices, or existing taxation rules or
practices, may cause adverse unexpected revenue or expense fluctuations and affect our reported
results of operations.
A change in accounting standards or practices, or a change in existing taxation rules or
practices, can have a significant effect on our reported results and may even affect our reporting
of transactions completed before the change is effective. New accounting pronouncements and
taxation rules and varying interpretations of accounting pronouncements and taxation practice have
occurred and may occur in the future. Changes to existing rules or standards, such as the potential
requirement that U.S. registrants prepare financial statements in accordance with International
Financial Reporting Standards, or the questioning of current practices may adversely affect our
reported financial results or the way we conduct our business. Our effective tax rate can also be
impacted by changes in estimates of prior years items, past and future levels of research and
development spending, the outcome of audits by federal, state and foreign jurisdictions and changes
in overall levels of income before tax.
We expect to continue to incur significant research and development expenses, which may reduce our
profitability.
In recent years, we have incurred significant costs in connection with the development of
blood screening and clinical diagnostic products, as well as our TIGRIS and PANTHER instrument
systems. We expect our expense levels to remain high in connection with our research and
development as we seek to expand our product offerings and continue to develop products and
technologies in collaboration with our partners. As a result, we will need to continue to generate
significant revenues to maintain current levels of profitability. Although we expect that our
research and development expenses as a percentage of revenue will decrease in future periods, we
may not be able to generate sufficient revenues to maintain current levels of profitability in the
future. A potential reduction of profitability in the future could cause the market price of our
common stock to decline.
44
Our marketable securities are subject to market and investment risks which may result in a loss of
value.
We engage one or more third parties to manage some of our cash consistent with an investment
policy that restricts investments to debt securities of high credit quality, with requirements
placed on maturities and concentration by security type and issue. These investments are intended
to preserve principal while providing liquidity adequate to meet our projected cash requirements.
Risk of principal loss is intended to be minimized through diversified short and medium term
investments of high quality, but these investments are not, in every case, guaranteed or fully
insured. In light of recent changes in the credit market, some high quality short term investment
securities, similar to the types of securities that we invest in, have suffered illiquidity, events
of default or deterioration in credit quality. If our short term investment portfolio becomes
affected by any of the foregoing or other adverse events, we may incur losses relating to these
investments. In addition, the Pacific Biosciences common stock we hold, which trades on the NASDAQ
Global Select Market under the symbol PACB, is also subject to various market and investment
risks. We may lose all or a portion of the value of our investment in Pacific Biosciences as a
result of a decline in the value of Pacific Biosciences common stock.
We may not have financing for future capital requirements, which may prevent us from addressing
gaps in our product offerings or improving our technology.
Although historically our cash flow from operations has been sufficient to satisfy working
capital and capital expenditure and research and development requirements, we may in the future
need to incur debt or issue equity in order to fund these requirements, as well as to make
acquisitions and other investments. If we cannot obtain debt or equity financing on acceptable
terms or are limited with respect to incurring debt or issuing equity, we may be unable to address
gaps in our product offerings or improve our technology, particularly through acquisitions or
investments.
If we raise funds through the issuance of debt or equity, any debt securities or preferred
stock issued will have rights, preferences and privileges senior to those of holders of our common
stock in the event of a liquidation and may contain other provisions that adversely affect the
rights of the holders of our common stock. The terms of any debt securities may impose restrictions
on our operations. If we raise funds through the issuance of equity or debt convertible into
equity, such financing would result in dilution to our stockholders.
If we or our contract manufacturers are unable to manufacture our products in sufficient
quantities, on a timely basis, at acceptable costs and in compliance with regulatory requirements,
our ability to sell our products will be harmed.
Our products must be manufactured in sufficient quantities and on a timely basis, while
maintaining product quality and acceptable manufacturing costs and complying with regulatory
requirements. In determining the required quantities of our products and the manufacturing
schedule, we must make significant judgments and estimates based on historical experience,
inventory levels, current market trends and other related factors. Because of the inherent nature
of estimates, there could be significant differences between our estimates and the actual amounts
of products we and our distributors require, which could harm our business and results of
operations.
Significant additional work will be required for scaling-up manufacturing of each new product
prior to commercialization, and we may not successfully complete this work. Manufacturing and
quality control problems have arisen and may arise in the future as we attempt to scale-up our
manufacturing of a new product, and we may not achieve scale-up in a timely manner, at a
commercially reasonable cost or at all. In addition, although we expect some of our newer products
and products under development to share production attributes with certain of our existing
products, production of these newer products may require the development of new manufacturing
technologies and expertise. We may be unable to develop the required technologies or expertise.
The amplified NAT tests that we produce are significantly more expensive to manufacture than
our non-amplified products. As we continue to develop new amplified NAT tests in response to market
demands for greater sensitivity, our product costs will increase significantly and our margins may
decline. We sell our products in a number of cost-sensitive market categories, and we may not be
able to manufacture these more complex amplified tests at costs that would allow us to maintain our
historical gross margin percentages. In addition, new products that detect or quantify more than
one target organism will contain significantly more complex reagents, which will increase the cost
of our manufacturing processes and quality control testing. We or other parties we engage to help
us may not be able to manufacture these products at a cost or in quantities that would make these
products
45
commercially viable. If we are unable to develop or contract for manufacturing capabilities on
acceptable terms for our products under development, we will not be able to conduct pre-clinical,
clinical and validation testing on these product candidates, which will prevent or delay regulatory
clearance or approval of these product candidates.
Blood screening and clinical diagnostic products are regulated by the FDA as well as other
foreign medical regulatory bodies. In some cases, such as in the United States and the EU, certain
products may also require individual lot release testing. Maintaining compliance with multiple
regulators, and multiple centers within the FDA, adds complexity and cost to our overall
manufacturing processes. In addition, our manufacturing facilities and those of our contract
manufacturers are subject to periodic regulatory inspections by the FDA and other federal and state
regulatory agencies, and these facilities are subject to FDA requirements relating to the Quality
System Regulation. We or our contractors may fail to satisfy these regulatory requirements in the
future, and any failure to do so may prevent us from selling our products.
Our sales to international markets are subject to additional risks.
Sales of our products outside the United States accounted for 26% of our total revenues for
the first three months of 2011 and 27% of our total revenues for 2010. Sales by Novartis of
collaboration blood screening products outside of the United States accounted for 53% of our total
international revenues for the first three months of 2011 and 58% of our total international
revenues for 2010.
We encounter risks inherent in international operations. We expect a significant portion of
our sales growth to come from expansion in international markets. If the value of the U.S. dollar
increases relative to foreign currencies, our products could become less competitive in
international markets. In addition, our international sales have increased as a result of our
acquisition of Tepnel and other international expansion efforts. Our international sales also may
be limited or disrupted by:
|
|
|
the imposition of government controls; |
|
|
|
|
export license requirements; |
|
|
|
|
economic and political instability; |
|
|
|
|
price controls; |
|
|
|
|
trade restrictions and tariffs; |
|
|
|
|
differing local product preferences and product requirements; and |
|
|
|
|
changes in foreign medical reimbursement and coverage policies and programs. |
In addition, we anticipate that requirements for smaller pool sizes of blood samples will
result in lower gross margin percentages, as additional tests are required to deliver the sample
results. We have already observed this trend with respect to certain sales in international
markets. In general, international pool sizes are smaller than domestic pool sizes and, therefore,
growth in blood screening revenues attributed to international expansion has led and we expect that
it will continue to lead to lower gross margin percentages.
If third-party payors do not reimburse our customers for the use of our clinical diagnostic
products or if they reduce reimbursement levels, our ability to sell our products will be harmed.
We sell our clinical diagnostic products primarily to large reference laboratories, public
health institutions and hospitals, substantially all of which receive reimbursement for the health
care services they provide to their patients from third-party payors, such as Medicare, Medicaid
and other government programs, private insurance plans and managed care programs. Most of these
third-party payors may deny reimbursement if they determine that a medical product was not used in
accordance with cost-effective treatment methods, as determined by the third-party payor, or was
used for an unapproved indication. Third-party payors may also refuse to reimburse for experimental
procedures and devices. In addition, foreign medical reimbursement rules are not always consistent
with
46
U.S. approaches and often differ from country to country, which complicates the process of
introducing new products in foreign jurisdictions.
Third-party payors reimbursement policies may affect sales of our products that screen for
more than one pathogen at the same time, such as our APTIMA Combo 2 product for screening for the
causative agents of chlamydial infections and gonorrhea in the same sample. Third-party payors may
choose to reimburse our customers on a per test basis, rather than on the basis of the number of
results given by the test. This may result in our customers electing to use separate tests to
screen for each disease so that they can receive reimbursement for each test they conduct. In that
event, these entities likely would purchase separate tests for each disease, rather than products
that test for more than one microorganism.
In addition, third-party payors are increasingly attempting to contain health care costs by
limiting both coverage and the level of reimbursement for medical products and services. Levels of
reimbursement may decrease in the future, and future legislation, regulation or reimbursement
policies of third-party payors may adversely affect the demand for and price levels of our
products. If our customers are not reimbursed for our products, they may reduce or discontinue
purchases of our products, which would cause our revenues to decline.
We are dependent on technologies we license, and if we fail to maintain our licenses or license
new technologies and rights to particular nucleic acid sequences for targeted diseases in the
future, we may be limited in our ability to develop new products.
We are dependent on licenses from third parties for some of our key technologies. For example,
our patented TMA technology is based on technology we have licensed from Stanford University. We
enter into new licensing arrangements in the ordinary course of business to expand our product
portfolio and access new technologies to enhance our products and develop new products. Many of
these licenses provide us with exclusive rights to the subject technology or disease marker. If our
license with respect to any of these technologies or markers is terminated for any reason, we may
not be able to sell products that incorporate the technology. In addition, we may lose competitive
advantages if we fail to maintain exclusivity under an exclusive license.
Our ability to develop additional diagnostic tests for diseases may depend on the ability of
third parties to discover particular sequences or markers and correlate them with disease, as well
as the rate at which such discoveries are made. Our ability to design products that target these
diseases may depend on our ability to obtain the necessary rights from the third parties that make
any of these discoveries. In addition, there are a finite number of diseases and conditions for
which our NAT assays may be economically viable. If we are unable to access new technologies or the
rights to particular sequences or markers necessary for additional diagnostic products on
commercially reasonable terms, we may be limited in our ability to develop new diagnostic products.
Our products and manufacturing processes require access to technologies and materials that may
be subject to patents or other intellectual property rights held by third parties. We may discover
that we need to obtain additional intellectual property rights in order to commercialize our
products. We may be unable to obtain such rights on commercially reasonable terms or at all, which
could adversely affect our ability to grow our business.
If we fail to attract, hire and retain qualified personnel, we may not be able to design, develop,
market or sell our products or successfully manage our business.
Competition for top management personnel is intense and we may not be able to recruit and
retain the personnel we need. The loss of any one of our management personnel or our inability to
identify, attract, retain and integrate additional qualified management personnel could make it
difficult for us to manage our business successfully, attract new customers, retain existing
customers and pursue our strategic objectives. Although we have employment agreements with most of
our executive officers, we may be unable to retain our existing management. We do not maintain key
person life insurance for any of our executive officers.
Competition for skilled sales, marketing, research, product development, engineering, and
technical personnel is intense and we may not be able to recruit and retain the personnel we need.
The loss of the services of key personnel, or our inability to hire new personnel with the
requisite skills, could restrict our ability to develop new
47
products or enhance existing products in a timely manner, sell products to our customers or
manage our business effectively.
If a natural or man-made disaster strikes our manufacturing facilities, we will be unable to
manufacture our products for a substantial amount of time and our sales will decline.
We manufacture substantially all of our products in five manufacturing facilities, two of
which are located in San Diego, California, two of which are located in Waukesha, Wisconsin and the
other is located in Stamford, Connecticut. These facilities and the manufacturing equipment we use
would be costly to replace and could require substantial lead time to repair or replace. Our
facilities may be harmed by natural or man-made disasters, including, without limitation,
earthquakes, tornadoes and fires, and in the event they are affected by a disaster, we would be
forced to rely on third-party manufacturers. The wildfires in San Diego in October 2007 required
that we temporarily shut down our facility for the manufacture of blood screening products. In the
event of a disaster, we may lose customers and we may be unable to regain those customers
thereafter. Although we possess insurance for damage to our property and the disruption of our
business from casualties, this insurance may not be sufficient to cover all of our potential losses
and may not continue to be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all.
In addition, we may also suffer disruptions in our ability to ship products to customers or
otherwise operate our business as a result of other natural disasters, such as the eruptions of a
volcano in Iceland which necessitated the closing of a significant portion of the airspace over
Europe for several days and caused the cancellation of thousands of airline flights during April
2010 or the earthquake and tsunami in Japan during March 2011. The occurrence of other natural
disasters having a similar effect could harm our business and results of operations.
If we use biological and hazardous materials in a manner that causes injury or violates laws, we
may be liable for damages.
Our research and development activities and our manufacturing activities involve the
controlled use of infectious agents, potentially harmful biological materials, as well as hazardous
materials, chemicals and various radioactive compounds. We cannot completely eliminate the risk of
accidental contamination or injury, and we could be held liable for damages that result from any
contamination or injury. In addition, we are subject to federal, state and local laws and
regulations governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and specified
waste products. The damages resulting from any accidental contamination and the cost of compliance
with environmental laws and regulations could be significant.
The anti-takeover provisions of our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, and provisions of
Delaware law, could delay or prevent a change of control that our stockholders may favor.
Provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated
bylaws may discourage, delay or prevent a merger or other change of control that our stockholders
may consider favorable or may impede the ability of the holders of our common stock to change our
management. The provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and
restated bylaws, among other things:
|
|
|
divide our board of directors into three classes, with members of each class to be
elected for staggered three-year terms; |
|
|
|
|
limit the right of stockholders to remove directors; |
|
|
|
|
regulate how stockholders may present proposals or nominate directors for election at
annual meetings of stockholders; and |
|
|
|
|
authorize our board of directors to issue preferred stock in one or more series,
without stockholder approval. |
In addition, because we have not chosen to be exempt from Section 203 of the Delaware General
Corporation Law, this provision could also delay or prevent a change of control that our
stockholders may favor. Section 203 provides that, subject to limited exceptions, persons that
acquire, or are affiliated with a person that acquires, more than 15 percent of the outstanding
voting stock of a Delaware corporation shall not engage in any business combination with that
corporation, including by merger, consolidation or acquisitions of additional shares, for a
48
three-year period following the date on which that person or its affiliate crosses the 15
percent stock ownership threshold.
If we do not effectively manage our growth, it could affect our ability to pursue opportunities
and expand our business.
Growth in our business, including as a result of acquisitions, has placed and may continue to
place a significant strain on our personnel, facilities, management systems and resources. We need
to continue to improve our operational and financial systems and managerial controls and procedures
and train and manage our workforce in order to effectively manage our growth. In addition, we will
have to maintain close coordination among our various departments and locations. If we fail to
effectively manage our growth, it could adversely affect our ability to pursue business
opportunities and expand our business.
Information technology systems implementation issues or security threats could disrupt our
internal operations and adversely affect our financial results.
Portions of our information technology infrastructure may experience interruptions, delays or
cessations of service or produce errors in connection with ongoing systems implementation work. In
particular, we have implemented an enterprise resource planning software system to replace our
various legacy systems. To more fully realize the potential of this system, we are continually
reassessing and upgrading processes and this may be more expensive, time consuming and resource
intensive than planned. Any disruptions that may occur in the operation of this system or any
future systems or any unauthorized access to our information systems could increase our expenses
and adversely affect our ability to report in an accurate and timely manner the results of our
consolidated operations, our financial position and cash flow and to otherwise operate our business
in a secure environment, all of which could adversely affect our financial results, stock price and
reputation.
Compliance with changing corporate governance and public disclosure regulations may result in
additional expenses.
Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public
disclosure, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act, new SEC regulations and Nasdaq Global Select Market rules, are creating
uncertainty for companies such as ours. To maintain high standards of corporate governance and
public disclosure, we have invested, and intend to continue to invest, in reasonably necessary
resources to comply with evolving standards. These investments have resulted in increased general
and administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from
revenue-generating activities and may continue to do so in the future.
49
Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
The following table summarizes our common stock repurchase activity during the first quarter
of 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Number |
|
|
Approximate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Shares |
|
|
Dollar Value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchased as |
|
|
of Shares that |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Part of |
|
|
May Yet Be |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Publicly |
|
|
Purchased |
|
|
|
Total Number |
|
|
Average |
|
|
Announced |
|
|
Under the |
|
|
|
of Shares |
|
|
Price Paid |
|
|
Plans or |
|
|
Plans or |
|
|
|
Purchased |
|
|
Per Share |
|
|
Programs |
|
|
Programs |
|
January 1-31, 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
150,000,000 |
|
February 1-28, 2011 |
|
|
425,193 |
|
|
|
62.55 |
|
|
|
420,400 |
|
|
|
123,710,704 |
|
March 1-31, 2011 |
|
|
336,027 |
|
|
|
64.68 |
|
|
|
335,200 |
|
|
|
102,028,452 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total (1) (2) |
|
|
761,220 |
|
|
$ |
63.49 |
|
|
|
755,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
In February 2011, our Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of
up to $150.0 million of our common stock until December 31, 2011,
through negotiated or open market transactions. There is no minimum or
maximum number of shares to be repurchased under the program. During
the first quarter of 2011, we repurchased and retired approximately
756,000 shares under this program at an average price of $63.49 per
share, or approximately $48.0 million in total. Our Board of Directors
authorized a similar repurchase program of up to $100.0 million of our
common stock in 2010, which was completed during the fourth quarter of
2010. |
|
(2) |
|
The difference between the total number of shares purchased and the
total number of shares purchased as part of publicly announced plans
or programs is due to the shares of common stock withheld by us for
the payment of taxes upon vesting of certain employees restricted
stock. During the first quarter of 2011, we repurchased and retired
5,620 shares of our common stock, at an average price of $63.76,
withheld by us to satisfy employee tax obligations upon vesting of
restricted stock granted under our 2003 Incentive Award Plan. We may
make similar repurchases in the future to satisfy employee tax
obligations upon vesting of restricted stock. |
Item 6. Exhibits
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
2.1(1)
|
|
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of October 6, 2009, by and among Gen-Probe
Incorporated, Prodigy Acquisition Corp., Prodesse, Inc. and Thomas M. Shannon and
R. Jeffrey Harris, as the Securityholders Representative Committee.* |
|
|
|
3.1(2)
|
|
Form of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Gen-Probe Incorporated. |
|
|
|
3.2(3)
|
|
Certificate of Amendment of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Gen-Probe
Incorporated. |
|
|
|
3.3(4)
|
|
Amended and Restated Bylaws of Gen-Probe Incorporated. |
|
|
|
3.4(5)
|
|
Certificate of Elimination of Series A Junior Participating Preferred Stock of
Gen-Probe Incorporated. |
|
|
|
4.1(2)
|
|
Specimen common stock certificate. |
|
|
|
10.1(6)
|
|
Amendment No. 3 to Credit Agreement dated as of February 10, 2011 by and between Gen-Probe
Incorporated, as Borrower, and Bank of America, N.A., as Lender. |
|
|
|
10.2§
|
|
Gen-Probe 2011 Employee Bonus Plan. |
50
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description |
10.3
|
|
Product Development Addendum for the Panther Instrument and Ultrio Elite Assay, dated as of
March 11, 2011, by and between Gen-Probe Incorporated and Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics,
Inc.** |
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification dated May 4, 2011, of Principal Executive Officer required pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification dated May 4, 2011, of Principal Financial Officer required pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Certification dated May 4, 2011, of Principal Executive Officer required pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
32.2
|
|
Certification dated May 4, 2011, of Principal Financial Officer required pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002. |
|
|
|
101
|
|
Interactive Data Files pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T. |
|
|
|
|
|
Filed herewith. |
|
|
|
Furnished herewith. |
|
§ |
|
Indicates management contract or compensatory plan, contract or arrangement. |
|
* |
|
Gen-Probe has received confidential treatment with respect to certain portions of this
exhibit. |
|
** |
|
Gen-Probe has requested confidential treatment with respect to certain portions of this
exhibit. |
|
(1) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2009 filed with the SEC on February 25, 2010. |
|
(2) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Amendment No. 2 to Registration Statement on Form 10
(File No. 000-49834) filed with the SEC on August 14, 2002. |
|
(3) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (File No. 001-31279)
for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2004 filed with the SEC on August 9, 2004. |
|
(4) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
February 18, 2009. |
|
(5) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2006 filed with the SEC on February 23, 2007. |
|
(6) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Gen-Probes Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on
February 15, 2011. |
51
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
GEN-PROBE INCORPORATED
|
|
DATE: May 4, 2011 |
By: |
/s/ Carl W. Hull
|
|
|
|
Carl W. Hull |
|
|
|
President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
(Principal Executive Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
DATE: May 4, 2011 |
By: |
/s/ Herm Rosenman
|
|
|
|
Herm Rosenman |
|
|
|
Senior Vice President Finance and
Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer and
Principal Accounting Officer) |
|
|
52