UNITED
STATES
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington,
D.C. 20549
________________
FORM
10-Q
________________
(Mark One)
[X] QUARTERLY
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended
December 31, 2007
or
[
] TRANSITION
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d)
OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Commission
File Number: 0-26824
TEGAL
CORPORATION
(Exact
Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)
Delaware
|
68-0370244
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
|
(I.R.S.
Employer Identification No.)
|
incorporation
or organization)
|
|
2201
South McDowell Blvd.
Petaluma,
California 94954
(Address
of Principal Executive Offices)
Telephone
Number (707) 763-5600
(Registrant’s
Telephone Number, Including Area Code)
________________
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be
filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the
preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required
to file reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the
past 90 days. Yes [X] No
[ ]
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of
“accelerated filer and large accelerated filer” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange
Act. (Check One):
Large
accelerated filer
[ ] Accelerated
filer
[ ] Non-accelerated
filer [X]
Indicate
by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes [ ] No [X]
As of February 13, 2008
there were 7,213,780 shares of the
Registrant’s common stock outstanding. The number of shares
outstanding reflects a 1 to 12 reverse stock split effected by the Registrant on
July 25, 2006.
TEGAL
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
INDEX
|
|
Page
|
|
PART
I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
|
|
Item
1.
|
Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements (Unaudited)
|
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2007 and March 31,
2007
|
3
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three months and nine months
ended December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006
|
3
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows as of December 31, 2007 and December
31, 2006
|
4
|
|
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements
|
5
|
Item
2.
|
Management’s
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
|
12
|
Item
3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk
|
14
|
Item
4.
|
Controls
and
Procedures
|
14
|
|
|
|
|
PART
II. OTHER INFORMATION
|
|
Item
1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
15
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
15
|
Item
6.
|
Exhibits
|
18
|
Signatures
|
19
|
|
PART
I — FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item
1. Condensed Consolidated
Financial Statements
TEGAL
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited)
(In
thousands, except share data)
|
|
December
31,
|
|
|
March
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2007
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
Current
assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
|
$ |
19,796 |
|
|
$ |
25,776 |
|
Accounts
receivable, net of allowances for sales returns and doubtful accounts of
$157 and $413 at December 31, 2007 and March 31, 2007,
respectively
|
|
|
10,202 |
|
|
|
6,634 |
|
Inventories,
net
|
|
|
11,071 |
|
|
|
5,567 |
|
Prepaid
expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
982 |
|
|
|
991 |
|
Total
current assets
|
|
|
42,051 |
|
|
|
38,968 |
|
Property
and equipment, net
|
|
|
1,216 |
|
|
|
1,351 |
|
Intangible
assets, net
|
|
|
964 |
|
|
|
1,161 |
|
Other
assets
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
176 |
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
44,335 |
|
|
$ |
41,656 |
|
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
|
|
Current
liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes
payable and bank lines of credit
|
|
$ |
— |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
1,909 |
|
|
|
1,974 |
|
Accrued
product warranty
|
|
|
1,953 |
|
|
|
1,101 |
|
Deferred
revenue
|
|
|
1,102 |
|
|
|
1,064 |
|
Litigation
suspense
|
|
|
18,505 |
|
|
|
19,500 |
|
Accrued
expenses and other current liabilities
|
|
|
3,453 |
|
|
|
3,590 |
|
Total
current liabilities
|
|
|
26,922 |
|
|
|
27,239 |
|
Total
liabilities
|
|
|
26,922 |
|
|
|
27,239 |
|
Commitments
and contingencies (Note 7)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders’
equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred
stock; $0.01 par value; 5,000,000 shares authorized; none issued and
outstanding
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
Common
stock; $0.01 par value; 50,000,000 shares authorized; 7,202,288 and
7,106,867 shares issued and
outstanding at December 31, 2007 and March 31, 2007,
respectively
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
Additional
paid-in capital
|
|
|
123,285 |
|
|
|
122,473 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income (loss)
|
|
|
(465 |
) |
|
|
240 |
|
Accumulated
deficit
|
|
|
(105,479 |
) |
|
|
(108,367 |
) |
Total
stockholders’ equity
|
|
|
17,413 |
|
|
|
14,417 |
|
Total
liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
|
$ |
44,335 |
|
|
$ |
41,656 |
|
See
accompanying notes.
TEGAL
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited)
(In
thousands, except per share data)
|
|
Three
Months Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
Nine
Months Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
10,145 |
|
|
$ |
4,377 |
|
|
$ |
25,543 |
|
|
$ |
16,066 |
|
Cost
of
revenue
|
|
|
5,725 |
|
|
|
5,703 |
|
|
|
15,262 |
|
|
|
12,494 |
|
Gross
profit
|
|
|
4,420 |
|
|
|
(1,326 |
) |
|
|
10,281 |
|
|
|
3,572 |
|
Operating
expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development
expenses
|
|
|
810 |
|
|
|
1,077 |
|
|
|
2,645 |
|
|
|
3,139 |
|
Sales
and marketing
expenses
|
|
|
923 |
|
|
|
949 |
|
|
|
3,208 |
|
|
|
2,957 |
|
General
and administrative
expenses
|
|
|
938 |
|
|
|
3,063 |
|
|
|
3,589 |
|
|
|
8,850 |
|
Total
operating
expenses
|
|
|
2,671 |
|
|
|
5,089 |
|
|
|
9,442 |
|
|
|
14,946 |
|
Operating
income
(loss)
|
|
|
1,749 |
|
|
|
(6,415 |
) |
|
|
839 |
|
|
|
(11,374 |
) |
Other
income (expense),
net
|
|
|
1,085 |
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
2,049 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
Net
income
(loss)
|
|
$ |
2,834 |
|
|
$ |
(6,125 |
) |
|
$ |
2,888 |
|
|
$ |
(11,208 |
) |
Net
income (loss) per share,
basic
|
|
$ |
0.40 |
|
|
$ |
(0.86 |
) |
|
$ |
0.41 |
|
|
$ |
(1.59 |
) |
Net
income (loss) per share,
diluted
|
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
|
$ |
(0.86 |
) |
|
$ |
0.40 |
|
|
$ |
(1.59 |
) |
Shares
used in per share computation:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
7,148 |
|
|
|
7,082 |
|
|
|
7,120 |
|
|
|
7,044 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
7,281 |
|
|
|
7,082 |
|
|
|
7,241 |
|
|
|
7,044 |
|
Note:
Shares used in per share computation for Basic and Diluted reflect a 1 to12
reverse stock split effected by the Company on July 25, 2006.
See
accompanying notes.
TEGAL
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
(In
thousands)
|
|
Nine Months
Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
2,888 |
|
|
$ |
(11,208 |
) |
Adjustments
to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation
and amortization
|
|
|
566 |
|
|
|
639 |
|
Stock
compensation expense
|
|
|
757 |
|
|
|
1,417 |
|
Stock
issued under stock purchase plan
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Provision
for doubtful accounts and sales returns allowances
|
|
|
(255 |
) |
|
|
259 |
|
Loss
on disposal of property and equipment
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
657 |
|
Fair
value of warrants and options issued for services rendered
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
Changes
in operating assets and liabilities, net of acquisitions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts
receivable
|
|
|
(3,297 |
) |
|
|
2,619 |
|
Inventories
net
|
|
|
(5,490 |
) |
|
|
1,621 |
|
Prepaid
expenses and other assets
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
Accounts
payable
|
|
|
(60 |
) |
|
|
(193 |
) |
Accrued
expenses and other current liabilities
|
|
|
(144 |
) |
|
|
(82 |
) |
Accrued
product warranty
|
|
|
896 |
|
|
|
340 |
|
Litigation
suspense
|
|
|
(995 |
) |
|
|
19,500 |
|
Deferred
revenue
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
317 |
|
Net
cash used in operating activities
|
|
|
(4,820 |
) |
|
|
16,003 |
|
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases
of property and equipment
|
|
|
(378 |
) |
|
|
(244 |
) |
Net
cash used in investing activities
|
|
|
(378 |
) |
|
|
(244 |
) |
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
proceeds from issuance of common stock
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
— |
|
(Repayments)
borrowings under notes payable and bank lines of credit
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
Payments
on capital lease financing
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Net
cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
10 |
|
Effect
of exchange rates on cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(772 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
Net
decrease in cash and cash equivalents((
|
|
|
(5,980 |
) |
|
|
15,715 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
25,776 |
|
|
|
13,787 |
|
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$ |
19,796 |
|
|
$ |
29,502 |
|
See
accompanying notes.
TEGAL
CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
(All
amounts in thousands, except share data)
1.
Basis of Presentation:
In the
opinion of management, the unaudited condensed consolidated interim financial
statements have been prepared on the same basis as the March 31, 2007 audited
consolidated financial statements and include all adjustments, consisting only
of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to fairly state the information set
forth herein. The statements have been prepared in accordance with
the regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), but omit
certain information and footnote disclosures necessary to present the statements
in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. These
interim financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited
consolidated financial statements and footnotes included in the Company’s Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007. The
results of operations for the three and nine months ended December 31, 2007 are
not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for the entire
year.
The
Company’s consolidated financial statements contemplate the realization of
assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. The
company had net income (losses) of $2,888 and ($11,208) for the
nine months ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The Company
generated (used) cash flows from operations of ($5,502) and $16,003 for the nine
month periods ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. During the fiscal
year 2006 the Company raised approximately $18,400 in net proceeds from the sale
of our common stock and warrants to institutional
investors. Management believes that these proceeds and the release of
the litigation suspense combined with the effects of consolidation of certain
operations and continued cost containment will be adequate to fund operations
through fiscal year 2009. However, projected sales may not
materialize and unforeseen costs may be incurred. If the projected
sales do not materialize, the Company will need to reduce expenses further and
raise additional capital, which may include the Company issuing debt or equity
securities. If additional funds are raised through the issuance of preferred
stock or debt, these securities could have rights, privileges or preferences
senior to those of common stock, and debt covenants could impose restrictions on
our operations. Moreover, the sale of equity or debt could result in
additional dilution to current stockholders. Such financing may not
be available to the Company on acceptable terms, if at all.
On July
25, 2006, the Company effected a 1-to-12 reverse stock split of the Company’s
common stock. The consolidated financial statements for current and
prior periods have been adjusted to reflect the change in number of
shares.
Concentration
of Credit Risk
Financial
instruments that potentially subject the Company to significant concentrations
of credit risk consist primarily of temporary cash investments and accounts
receivable. Substantially all of the Company’s temporary investments are
invested in money market funds. The Company’s accounts receivable are derived
primarily from sales to customers located in the United States, Europe and Asia.
The Company performs ongoing credit evaluations of its customers and generally
requires no collateral. The Company maintains reserves for potential credit
losses. Write-offs during the periods presented have been insignificant. As of
December 31, 2007 two customers accounted for 81% of outstanding accounts
receivable balance. As of March 31, 2007 three customers accounted
for approximately 86% of the accounts receivable balance. As of
December 31, 2006, one customer accounted for 35% of outstanding accounts
receivable balance.
During
the three months ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, two customers accounted for
82% of total revenue and one customer accounted for 65% of total revenue,
respectively. During the nine months ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 one
customer accounted for 71% of total revenue and one customer accounted for 55%
of total revenue, respectively.
Stock-Based
Compensation
The
Company has adopted several stock plans that provide equity to the Company’s
employees and non-employee directors. The Company’s plans include incentive and
non-statutory stock options and restricted stock awards. Stock options and
restricted stock awards generally vest ratably over a four-year period on the
anniversary date of the grant, and expire ten years after the grant
date. On occasion restricted stock awards may vest on the achievement
of specific performance targets. The Company also has an employee
stock purchase plan that allows qualified employees to purchase shares of common
stock of the Company at 85% of the fair market value on specified
dates. The difference between the purchase value and the market value
is expensed as compensation. Fiscal year to date, the expense for the
ESPP plan is $4.
Effective
April 1, 2006, we adopted the fair value recognition provisions of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share Based Payment” (SFAS
123R) using the modified prospective transition method. Under that
transition method, compensation expense that we recognized for the three months
ended December 31, 2006 included: (a) compensation expense for all share-based
payments granted prior to but not yet vested as of April 1, 2006, based on the
grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the original provisions of
SFAS 123, and (b) compensation expense for all share-based payments granted or
modified on or after April 1, 2006, based on the grant date fair value estimated
in accordance with the provisions of SFAS 123R. Compensation expense
is recognized only for those awards that are expected to vest, whereas prior to
the adoption of SFAS 123R, we recognized forfeitures as they
occurred. In addition, we elected the straight-line attribution
method as our accounting policy for recognizing stock-based compensation expense
for all awards that are granted on or after April 1, 2006. Results in
prior periods have not been restated.
Total
compensation expense for the nine months ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 was
$842 and $463, respectively. Total compensation expense for the three
months ended December 31, 2007 and 2006 was $66 and $233.
The
following assumptions are included in the estimated grant date fair value
calculations for the Company’s stock option awards and Employee Qualified Stock
Purchase Plan (“ESPP”):
|
December
31, 2007 |
December
31, 2006 |
|
Expected
life (years):
|
|
|
|
Stock
options
|
3.4
|
4.0
|
|
ESPP
|
0.5
|
0.5
|
|
Volatility:
|
|
|
|
Stock
options
|
70%
|
96%
|
|
ESPP
|
46%
|
58%
|
|
Risk-free
interest rate
|
4.5%
|
4.7%
|
|
Dividend
yield
|
0%
|
0%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stock
Options & Warrants
A summary
of stock option and warrant activity during the three months ended December 31,
2007 is as follows:
|
|
Shares
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Exercise Price
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Remaining Contractual Term (in Years)
|
|
|
Aggregate
Intrinsic Value
|
|
BEGINNING
OUTSTANDING
|
|
|
2,016,899 |
|
|
$ |
11.37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GRANTED
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price =
Market Value
|
|
|
216,616 |
|
|
$ |
4.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
216,616 |
|
|
$ |
4.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EXERCISED
|
|
|
— |
|
|
$ |
4.20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CANCELLED
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(4,375 |
) |
|
$ |
4.60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expired
|
|
|
(4,891 |
) |
|
$ |
13.03 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
(9,266 |
) |
|
$ |
9.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ENDING
OUTSTANDING
|
|
|
2,224,249 |
|
|
$ |
10.68 |
|
|
|
4.61 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
ENDING
VESTED + EXPECTED TO VEST
|
|
|
2,180,635 |
|
|
$ |
10.80 |
|
|
|
4.52 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
ENDING
EXERCISABLE
|
|
|
1,789,443 |
|
|
$ |
12.16 |
|
|
|
3.48 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The aggregate intrinsic
value of options and warrants outstanding as of December 31, 2007 is calculated
as the difference between the exercise price of the underlying options and the
market price of our common stock as of December 31, 2007.
The following table
summarizes information with respect to stock options and warrants outstanding as
of December 31, 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
|
|
Range
of
Exercise Prices
|
|
|
Number
Outstanding
As
of
December
31, 2007
|
|
|
Weighted
Average Remaining Contractual
Term (in
years)
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
|
|
|
Number
Exercisable
As of
December
31, 2007
|
|
|
Exercise
Price
As
of December 31, 2007
|
|
$ |
4.20 |
|
|
$ |
4.20 |
|
|
|
216,699 |
|
|
|
9.96
|
|
|
$ |
4.20 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
$ |
4.20 |
|
|
4.60 |
|
|
|
4.60 |
|
|
|
292,361 |
|
|
|
8.65 |
|
|
|
4.60 |
|
|
|
118,572 |
|
|
|
4.60 |
|
|
4.68 |
|
|
|
7.08 |
|
|
|
235,400 |
|
|
|
5.26 |
|
|
|
6.13 |
|
|
|
192,275 |
|
|
|
6.13 |
|
|
7.20 |
|
|
|
8.28 |
|
|
|
59,162 |
|
|
|
7.45 |
|
|
|
8.19 |
|
|
|
59,162 |
|
|
|
8.19 |
|
|
12.00 |
|
|
|
12.00 |
|
|
|
1,284,990 |
|
|
|
2.68 |
|
|
|
12.00 |
|
|
|
1,284,990 |
|
|
|
12.00 |
|
|
12.36 |
|
|
|
73.50 |
|
|
|
128,142 |
|
|
|
3.36 |
|
|
|
26.84 |
|
|
|
126,866 |
|
|
|
26.95 |
|
|
92.26 |
|
|
|
92.26 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
2.19 |
|
|
|
92.26 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
92.26 |
|
|
92.52 |
|
|
|
92.52 |
|
|
|
4,165 |
|
|
|
2.13 |
|
|
|
92.52 |
|
|
|
4,165 |
|
|
|
92.52 |
|
|
99.00 |
|
|
|
99.00 |
|
|
|
2,498 |
|
|
|
2.24 |
|
|
|
99.00 |
|
|
|
2,498 |
|
|
|
99.00 |
|
|
105.00 |
|
|
|
105.00 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
4.73 |
|
|
|
105.00 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
105.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
4.20 |
|
|
$ |
105.00 |
|
|
|
2,224,249 |
|
|
|
4.61 |
|
|
$ |
10.68 |
|
|
|
1,789,443 |
|
|
$ |
12.16 |
|
Restricted
Stock
The
following table summarizes our restricted stock award activity for the three
months ended December 31, 2007:
|
|
Number
of
Shares
|
|
|
Weighted
Avg.
Grant
Date
Fair Value
|
|
Balance,
September 30, 2007
|
|
|
436,362 |
|
|
$ |
5.41 |
|
Granted
|
|
|
32,397 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
(4,375 |
) |
|
|
— |
|
Released
|
|
|
(100,680 |
) |
|
|
4.82 |
|
Balance,
December 31, 2007
|
|
|
363,704 |
|
|
$ |
4.00 |
|
Unvested
restricted stock at December 31, 2007
As of
December 31, 2007, the total unrecognized compensation expense related to
unvested restricted stock is $3,991. This cost is expected to be
recognized over a weighted average period of 1.99
years.
2.
Inventories:
Inventories
are stated at the lower of cost or market, reduced by provisions for excess and
obsolescence. Cost is computed using standard cost, which approximates actual
cost on a first-in, first-out basis and includes material, labor and
manufacturing overhead costs. The Company estimates the effects of excess and
obsolescence on the carrying values of our inventories based upon estimates of
future demand and market conditions. The Company establishes provisions for
related inventories in excess of production demand. Should actual production
demand differ from our estimates, additional inventory write-downs may be
required. Any excess and obsolete provision is released only if and
when the related inventory is sold or scrapped. During the nine
months ended December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006, the Company sold or
scrapped previously reserved inventory of $148 and $3,024 respectively.
The inventory provision
balance
at
December
31, 2007 and December 31, 2006 was $3,760 and $4,112, respectively.
Inventories
as of the dates presented consisted of:
|
|
December
31,
2007
|
|
|
March
31,
2007
|
|
Raw
materials
|
|
$ |
4,911 |
|
|
$ |
1,315 |
|
Work
in
progress
|
|
|
4,269 |
|
|
|
2,928 |
|
Finished
goods and
spares
|
|
|
1,891 |
|
|
|
1,324 |
|
|
|
$ |
11,071 |
|
|
$ |
5,567 |
|
The
Company periodically analyzes any systems that are in finished goods inventory
to determine if they are suitable for current customer
requirements. At the present time, the company’s policy is that, if
after approximately 18 months, it determines that a sale will not take place
within the next 12 months and the system would be useable for customer
demonstrations or training, it is transferred to fixed
assets. Otherwise, it is expensed.
3.
Product Warranty:
The
Company provides warranty on all system sales based on the estimated cost of
product warranties at the time revenue is recognized. The warranty
obligation is affected by product failure rates, material usage rates, and the
efficiency by which the product failure is corrected. Warranty
activity for the three months and nine months ended December 31, 2007 and 2006
was:
|
|
Warranty
Activity for the
Three
Months Ended
December
31,
|
|
|
Warranty
Activity for the
Nine
Months Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Balance
at the beginning of the period
|
|
$ |
1,435 |
|
|
$ |
800 |
|
|
$ |
1,101 |
|
|
$ |
723 |
|
Additional
warranty accruals for warranties issued during the period
|
|
|
719 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
707 |
|
Settlements
made during the period
|
|
|
(201 |
) |
|
|
(156 |
) |
|
|
(1,148 |
) |
|
|
(578 |
) |
Balance
at the end of the period
|
|
$ |
1,953 |
|
|
$ |
852 |
|
|
$ |
1,953 |
|
|
$ |
852 |
|
Certain
of the Company's sales contracts include provisions under which customers would
be indemnified by the Company in the event of, among other things, a third-party
claim against the customer for intellectual property rights infringement related
to the Company's products. There are no limitations on the maximum potential
future payments under these guarantees. The Company has accrued no amounts in
relation to these provisions as no such claims have been made and the Company
believes it has valid, enforceable rights to the intellectual property embedded
in its products.
4. Net
Income (Loss) per Common Share:
Basic net
income (loss) per common share is computed by dividing net income (loss) by the
weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding during the
period. For purposes of computing basic net income (loss) per share,
the weighted-average number of outstanding shares of common stock excludes
unvested restricted stock awards, which include restricted stock and restricted
stock units that are settled in stock.
Diluted
net income (loss) per share is computed using the weighted-average number of
common and dilutive common equivalent shares outstanding during the
period. Dilutive common equivalent shares consist primarily of stock
options and restricted stock awards.
The
following table represents the calculation of basic and diluted net loss per
common share (in thousands, except per share data) for the periods
presented:
Three Months
Ended December
31,
Nine
Months Ended December
31, |
|
|
|
2007
2006
2007
2006 |
|
|
Net
income (loss) applicable to common stockholders
|
|
$ |
2,834 |
|
|
$ |
(6,125 |
) |
|
$ |
2,888 |
|
|
$ |
(11,208 |
) |
Basic
and diluted:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
weighted-average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
7,148 |
|
|
|
7,082 |
|
|
|
7,120 |
|
|
|
7,044 |
|
Dilutive
common equivalent shares
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Diluted
weighted-average shares outstanding
|
|
|
7,281 |
|
|
|
7,082 |
|
|
|
7,241 |
|
|
|
7,044 |
|
Basic
net income (loss) per share
|
|
$ |
0.40 |
|
|
$ |
(0.86 |
) |
|
$ |
0.41 |
|
|
$ |
(1.59 |
) |
Diluted
net income (loss) per
share
|
|
$ |
0.39 |
|
|
$ |
(0.86 |
) |
|
$ |
0.40 |
|
|
$ |
(1.59 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding
options and warrants were not included in the computation of diluted net loss
per common share for the periods presented if their effect would be
anti-dilutive. Such securities could potentially dilute earnings per
share in future periods. Generally options are considered
anti-dilutive when their exercise prices are greater than or equal to the
average market value of our common shares during the period of measurement.
These securities totaled 2,587,953 and 2,967,302 equivalent shares
of common stock as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. The
weighted-average exercise price was $9.74 and $11.40 per share as of December
31, 2007 and 2006 respectively.
5. Stock-Based
Transactions:
Issuance
of Warrants to Consultants
The
Company is party to a contract with certain consultants pursuant to which the
Company will issue warrants on a monthly basis in lieu of cash payments through
December 2007. During the nine months ended December 31, 2007 the
Company issued warrants to purchase 7,500 shares valued at $33 using the
Black-Scholes model with an exercise price at the market value on the day of the
grant and an average interest rate of 4.51% and a 5 year life. None
of these warrants have been exercised as of December 31, 2007.
6. Legal
Proceedings:
Sputtered Films, Inc. v.
Advanced Modular Sputtering, et al., filed in Santa Barbara County Superior
Court.
On
December 22, 2003, Sputtered Films, Inc. ("SFI"), a wholly owned subsidiary of
the Company, filed an action against two former employees, Sergey Mishin and
Rose Stuart-Curran, and a company they formed after leaving their employment
with SFI named Advanced Modular Sputtering, Inc. ("AMS"). Sergey
Mishin and Rose Stuart-Curran had each signed confidentiality and non-disclosure
agreements regarding information obtained while employed by SFI. The
action contained causes of action for specific performance, breach of contract,
breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, misappropriation of trade
secrets, unfair competition, unfair business practices, interference with
prospective economic advantage, conversion, unjust enrichment, and declaratory
relief. These claims arose out of information SFI received evidencing
that AMS possessed and used SFI's confidential, proprietary and trade secret
drawings, specifications and technology to manufacture the sputtering tool
marketed by AMS.
On
November 13, 2006, following commencement of the trial, all the parties in the
litigation agreed on terms of a settlement, which was filed with the
court. Among other things, the settlement called for the transfer of
assets related to PVD technology from AMS to SFI, the dissolution of AMS as of
March 1, 2007 and the assumption by Tegal of certain warranty obligations of
AMS. The Avago Cross-Complaint was also dismissed as part of the
settlement. A final confidential settlement and release of claims was executed
among the parties on December 21, 2006.
The two
law firms representing SFI in this matter claimed they were entitled, as a
result of the settlement, to receive contingent fees from Tegal and
SFI. Keker & Van Nest LLP (“KVN”) claimed fees in the amount of
$6,717; Gonzalez & Leigh LLP (“G&L”) claimed fees in the amount of
$2,249. We initiated proceedings with the Bar Association of San
Francisco (“BASF”), pursuant to California statutes, to dispute the claims of
both firms. KVN filed suit against us and SFI in San Francisco
Superior Court and the action was stayed pending completion of the BASF
proceedings. G&L did not file suit. We identified
legal and factual defenses to substantial elements of the claims and vigorously
contested the matter.
As a
result of the dispute described above, as of March 31, 2007, we had placed
$19,500, representing the gross cash proceeds from the recent settlement of this
litigation into suspense. Since the amount
disputed could not be determined with reasonable certainty until the
dispute was resolved, we elected to suspend the entire amount, in accordance
with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 5, “Accounting for
Contingencies.”
Prior to
the September 11, 2007 arbitration hearing, G&L settled its claim against
the Company for $995, and the resulting payment by the Company to G&L of
$995 was released from the litigation in suspense proceeds. Until
recently KVN continued to pursue its original claim. However, on
January 16, 2008, Tegal received a Notice of Acceptance of Written Offer to
Compromise from KVN. In connection with KVN’s acceptance of the
Company’s Written Offer to Compromise and the execution of a mutual general
release, dated as of January 18, 2008, the Company has paid KVN $3,800. As a
result, the Company will eliminate the litigation suspense along with other
liabilities related to the AMS Settlement, and the net proceeds will be recorded
as other income in the fiscal fourth quarter ending March 31, 2008.
7.
Geographical Information:
The
Company operates in one segment for the manufacture, marketing and servicing of
integrated circuit fabrication equipment. In accordance with SFAS No.
131 “Disclosures About
Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information” (SFAS 131), the
Company’s chief operating decision-maker has been identified as the President
and Chief Executive Officer, who reviews operating results to make decisions
about allocating resources and assessing performance for the entire
company. All material operating units qualify for aggregation under
SFAS 131 due to their identical customer base and similarities in: economic
characteristics; nature of products and services; and procurement, manufacturing
and distribution processes. Since Tegal operates in one segment and
in one group of similar products and services, all financial segment and product
line information required by SFAS 131 can be found in the consolidated financial
statements.
For
geographical reporting, revenues are attributed to the geographic location in
which the customers’ facilities are located. Long-lived assets
consist primarily of property, plant and equipment, and are attributed to the
geographic location in which they are located. Net sales and
long-lived assets by geographic region were as follows:
|
|
Revenue
for the
Three
Months Ended December 31,
|
|
|
Revenue
for the
Nine Months
Ended December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Sales
to customers located in:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United
States
|
|
$ |
3,315 |
|
|
$ |
2,037 |
|
|
$ |
4,431 |
|
|
$ |
5,799 |
|
Asia,
excluding
Japan
|
|
|
5,721 |
|
|
|
1,311 |
|
|
|
8,923 |
|
|
|
5,923 |
|
Japan
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
377 |
|
|
|
474 |
|
|
|
2,053 |
|
Germany
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
635 |
|
|
|
2,116 |
|
|
|
2,230 |
|
Europe,
excluding
Germany
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
9,599 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
Total
sales
|
|
$ |
10,145 |
|
|
$ |
4,377 |
|
|
$ |
25,543 |
|
|
$ |
16,066 |
|
|
|
Long-lived
Assets
as of
December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Long-lived
assets at period-end:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United
States
|
|
$ |
2,171 |
|
|
$ |
2,333 |
|
Europe
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Japan
|
|
|
— |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Total
long-lived assets
|
|
$ |
2,180 |
|
|
$ |
2,350 |
|
8. Recent
Accounting Pronouncements:
In June
2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) ratified the consensus
reached by the Emerging Issues Task Force (“EITF”) regarding EITF Issue No.
06-03, “How Taxes Collected
from Customers and Remitted to Government Authorities Should be Presented in the
Income Statement (That Is, Gross versus Net Presentation)”. This guidance
requires that companies disclose this accounting policy related to sales tax and
other similar taxes, effective for interim and annual reporting periods
beginning after December 15, 2006. We report these taxes on a net
basis, excluding them from revenue.
In
July 2006, FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainties in
Income Taxes — An Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109” (FIN
48), effective for fiscal periods beginning after December 15,
2006. FIN 48 requires recognition on the financial statements of the
effects of a tax position when it is more likely than not, based on the
technical merits, that the position will be sustained upon
examination. FIN 48 has no material effect on the Company’s
consolidated financial statements.
In
September 2006, FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(“SFAS”) No. 157, “Fair
Value Measurements” (SFAS 157), which established a common definition for
fair value to be applied to U.S. GAAP guidance requiring use of fair value.
Also, SFAS 157 establishes a framework for measuring fair value, and expands
disclosure about such fair value measurements. SFAS 157 is effective for fiscal
years beginning after November 15, 2007. The Company is currently evaluating the
impact of SFAS 157 on its consolidated financial statements.
In
February 2007, FASB issued SFAS No. 159, “The Fair Value Option for
Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities—Including an amendment of SFAS 115”
(SFAS 159). The new statement allows entities to choose, at specified election
dates, to measure eligible financial instruments and certain other items at fair
value that are not otherwise required to be so measured. If a company elects the
fair value option for an eligible item, changes in that item’s fair value in
subsequent reporting periods must be recognized in current earnings. SFAS 159 is
effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. The Company
is currently evaluating the potential impact of SFAS 159 on its consolidated
financial statements.
In
December 2007, FASB issued SFAS No. 141 (revised 2007), Business Combinations, (SFAS
141R) which replaces SFAS No 141. SFAS 141R retains the purchase
method of accounting for acquisitions, but requires a number of changes,
including changes in the way assets and liabilities are recognized in the
purchase accounting. It also changes the recognition of assets acquired and
liabilities assumed arising from contingencies, requires the capitalization of
in-process research and development at fair value, and requires the expensing of
acquisition-related costs as incurred. SFAS No. 141R is effective for the
Company beginning March 31, 2009 and will apply prospectively to business
combinations completed on or after that date. SFAS 141R has no
material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In
December 2007, FASB issued SFAS No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements, an amendment of ARB 51, (SFAS 160)
which changes the accounting and reporting for minority interests. Minority
interests will be recharacterized as noncontrolling interests and will be
reported as a component of equity separate from the parent’s equity, and
purchases or sales of equity interests that do not result in a change in control
will be accounted for as equity transactions. In addition, net income
attributable to the noncontrolling interest will be included in consolidated net
income on the face of the income statement and, upon a loss of control, the
interest sold, as well as any interest retained, will be recorded at fair value
with any gain or loss recognized in earnings. SFAS No. 160 is effective for
the Company beginning March 31, 2009 and will apply prospectively, except for
the presentation and disclosure requirements, which will apply retrospectively.
SFAS 160 has no material effect on the Company’s consolidated financial
statements.
9. Subsequent
Event – Update to Legal Proceeding:
On
January 16, 2008, the Company received a Notice of Acceptance of Written Offer
to Compromise from KVN regarding litigation related to attorneys’ fees in the
case of Sputtered
Films, Inc. v. Advanced Modular Sputtering, et al., filed in Santa Barbara
County Superior Court. For more information see Part I,
Item 6 Legal Proceedings. In connection with KVN’s acceptance of the
Company’s Written Offer to Compromise and the execution of a mutual general
release, dated as of January 18, 2008, the Company has paid KVN $3,800. As a
result, the Company will eliminate the litigation suspense along with other
liabilities related to the AMS Settlement, and the net proceeds will be recorded
as other income in the fiscal fourth quarter ending March 31, 2008.
Item
2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis
of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – (Amounts in
thousands)
Special
Note Regarding Forward Looking Statements
Information
herein contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, which can be identified by the use of
forward-looking terminology such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “anticipate,”
“estimate,” or “continue” or the negative thereof or other variations thereon or
comparable terminology or which constitute projected financial
information. The forward-looking statements relate to the near-term
semiconductor capital equipment industry outlook, demand for our products, our
quarterly revenue and earnings prospects for the near-term future and other
matters contained herein. Such statements are based on current
expectations and beliefs and involve a number of uncertainties and risks that
could cause the actual results to differ materially from those projected. Such
uncertainties and risks include, but are not limited to, cyclicality of the
semiconductor industry, impediments to customer acceptance of our products,
fluctuations in quarterly operating results, competitive pricing pressures, the
introduction of competitor products having technological and/or pricing
advantages, product volume and mix and other risks detailed from time to time in
our SEC reports, including in the section entitled “Risk Factors” in Part II,
Item 1A of this report. For further information, refer to the
business description and risk factors described below. These
forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as predictions of future
events as we cannot assure you that the events or circumstances reflected in
these statements will be achieved or will occur. All
forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the
cautionary statements in this paragraph.
Overview
Tegal
Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Tegal” or the “Company”), designs,
manufactures, markets and services plasma etch and deposition systems that
enable the production of integrated circuits (“ICs”), memory and related
microelectronics devices used in personal computers, wireless voice and data
telecommunications, contact-less transaction devices, radio frequency
identification devices (“RFID’s”), smart cards, data storage and micro-level
actuators. Etching and deposition constitute two of the principal IC and related
device production process steps and each must be performed numerous times in the
production of such devices.
Semiconductor
Industry Background
Over the
past twenty years, the semiconductor industry has experienced significant
growth. This growth has resulted from the increasing demand for ICs from
traditional IC markets, such as personal computers, telecommunications, consumer
electronics, automotive electronics and office equipment, as well as developing
markets, such as wireless communications, multimedia and portable and network
computing. As a result of this increased demand, semiconductor device
manufacturers have periodically expended significant amounts of capital to build
new semiconductor fabrication facilities (“fabs”) and to expand existing
fabs. More recently, growth has slowed, and the industry is maturing
as the cost of building new wafer fabs has increased
dramatically. While unit demand for semiconductor devices continue to
rise, the average selling prices of chips continue to decline. There
is growing pressure on semiconductor device manufacturers to reduce
manufacturing costs while increasing the value of their products. The
semiconductor industry has also been historically cyclical, with periods of
rapid expansion followed by periods of over-capacity.
Growth in
the semiconductor industry has been driven, in large part, by advances in
semiconductor performance at a decreasing cost per function. Advanced
semiconductor processing technologies increasingly allow semiconductor
manufacturers to produce ICs with smaller features, thereby increasing
processing speed and expanding device functionality and memory capacity. As ICs
have become more complex, however, both the number and cost of state-of-the-art
process tools required to manufacture ICs have increased significantly. As a
result, the cost of semiconductor manufacturing equipment has become an
increasingly large part of the total cost of producing advanced
ICs.
To create
an IC, semiconductor wafers are subjected to a large number of complex process
steps. The three primary steps in manufacturing ICs are (1) deposition, in which
a layer of insulating or conducting material is deposited on the wafer surface,
(2) photolithography, in which the circuit pattern is projected onto a light
sensitive material (the photoresist), and (3) etch, in which the unmasked parts
of the deposited material on the wafer are selectively removed to form the IC
circuit pattern.
Each step
of the manufacturing process for ICs requires specialized manufacturing
equipment. Today, plasma-based systems are used for the great majority of both
deposition and etching processes. During physical vapor deposition (also known
as “PVD”), the semiconductor wafer is exposed to a plasma environment that forms
continuous thin films of electrically insulating or electrically conductive
layers on the semiconductor wafer. During a plasma etch process (also known as
“dry etch”), a semiconductor wafer is exposed to a plasma composed of a reactive
gas, such as chlorine, which etches away selected portions of the layer
underlying the patterned photoresist layer.
Business
Strategy
Our
business objective is to utilize the technologies that we have developed
internally or acquired externally in order to increase our market share in
process equipment for both semiconductor manufacturing and nanotechnology device
fabrication. In the recent past, we have attempted to “leap frog”
more established competitors by being “designed-in” to the advanced device
fabrication plans of our customers. We have done so primarily by
engaging in research and development activities on behalf of our customers that
our more established competitors were unwilling or unable to
perform. Many of these advanced devices promise substantial returns
as consumer demand for certain functions grows and new markets are
created. However, the timing of the emergence of such demand, such as
broadband wireless communications and RFID tags is highly
uncertain. In addition, the successful integration by our customers
of all the various technical processes required to manufacture a device at an
acceptable cost is also highly uncertain. While we have seen
increased demand from our customers this fiscal year, we cannot accurately
predict the timing of the stable emergence of these
markets. Even though our sales have increased over the past three
quarters, due to the cyclical nature of our industry, we expect that net orders
will continue to fluctuate. In the meantime, our costs for
maintaining our research and development efforts and our service and
manufacturing infrastructure have remained constant or in some cases
increased.
At the
present time, we are continuing our transition of the Company’s dependence on
these highly unpredictable markets to more established equipment markets, where
our success is dependent more on our ability to apply successfully our
engineering capabilities to solving existing manufacturing
problems. We aim to carefully manage this transition by limiting our
research and development efforts to the most promising near-term sales
opportunities, while at the same time redirecting all our available resources
toward new products aimed at established equipment markets. Because
of our relatively small size, our ability to meet the needs of individual
customers is far more important to our success than either macro economic
factors or industry-wide factors such as cyclicality, although both of these
factors affect our performance as well. As a result, our methods of
evaluating our progress will continue to be highly
customer-focused.
In order
to achieve our business strategy, we are focused on the following key
elements:
Maintaining our Technology
Leadership Position in New Materials Etch – We have become a leading
provider of etch process solutions for a set of new materials central to the
production of an array of advanced semiconductor and nanotechnology devices in
emerging markets. Incorporation of these new materials is essential
to achieving the higher device densities, lower power consumption and novel
functions exhibited by the newest generation of cell phones, computer memories,
fiber optic switches and remote sensors. Currently, we are a leading
supplier of etch solutions to makers of various advanced “non-volatile”
memories, as well as to device makers incorporating compound metals and certain
high-K dielectric materials into their devices. Our new materials
expertise also includes the etching of so-called “compound-semi” materials, such
as gallium arsenide, gallium nitride and indium phosphide, widely used in
telecom device production. In addition, we are known for our
capability to etch certain noble metals, such as gold and platinum, as well as
certain proprietary compound metals. This capability is increasingly
important in advanced memory development and in the production of
Micro-Electrical Mechanical Systems (“MEMS”), a type of commercially produced
nanotechnology device, especially useful to the automotive
industry.
Strengthening our Position in
Deposition Process Equipment – Since 2002, we have completed two
acquisitions of deposition products incorporating the same unique “sputter-up”
technology. In December 2006, as a result of the settlement of our
litigation with Advanced Modular Systems (“AMS”) and others, we also acquired
the assets and know-how of a similar deposition system. These
deposition tools enable the production of highly-oriented, thin piezoelectric
films composed of aluminum nitride. Such films are incorporated into
high frequency filters called Bulk Acoustic Wave (BAW) and Film Bulk Acoustic
Resonators (FBARs) used in cellular telephony and wireless
communications. In addition, our PVD products are well-suited
for applications within “back-end” semiconductor manufacturing processes,
including backside metallization of ultra-thin wafers and underbump metal
processes. These processes are important to power devices, as well as
certain advanced, wafer-level packaging schemes, which are increasingly being
used for high-pin-count logic and memory devices.
Introducing a New Product into
Established Equipment Market - The continued development of our recently
acquired Nano Layer Deposition (“NLD”) technology represents our belief that we
have a compelling solution to a critical process need in present-day and future
semiconductor device fabrication. As device geometries continue to
shrink, conventional chemical vapor deposition (“CVD”) process equipment is
increasingly incapable of depositing thin conformal films in high-aspect ratio
trenches and vias. Atomic Level Deposition (“ALD”) is one technology
for satisfying this deposition requirement. However, ALD has several
shortcomings, including low throughput and limitations on film type and quality,
which we believe our NLD technology overcomes.
Maintaining our Service Leadership
Position - Tegal has been consistently recognized by our
customers for providing a high level of customer support, a fact that has been
noted by our top rankings for several consecutive years in the annual survey
conducted by VLSI Research, Inc. We expect to maintain and build on
this reputation as we seek new customers in both emerging and established
markets.
Critical
Accounting Policies
Our
discussion and analysis of the financial condition and results of operations are
based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of
America. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make
estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities,
revenues and expenses, and related disclosure of contingent assets and
liabilities. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those
related to revenue recognition, bad debts, sales returns allowance, inventory,
intangible and long lived assets, warranty obligations, restructure expenses,
deferred taxes and freight charged to customers. We base our estimates on
historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be
reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for
making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities that are
not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these
estimates under different assumptions or conditions
We
believe the following critical accounting policies are the most significant to
the presentation of our consolidated financial statements:
Accounting
for Stock-Based Compensation
We have
adopted several stock plans that provide equity instruments to our employees and
non-employee directors. Our plans include incentive and non-statutory stock
options and restricted stock awards. Stock options and restricted stock awards
generally vest ratably over a four-year period on the anniversary date of the
grant, and expire ten years after the grant date. Certain restricted
stock awards may vest on the achievement of specific performance
targets. We also have employee stock purchase plans that allow
qualified employees to purchase Tegal shares at 85% of the fair market value on
specified dates. The difference between the purchase value and the
market value is expensed as compensation.
Prior to
April 1, 2006 we accounted for these stock-based employee compensation plans
under the measurement and recognition provisions of Accounting Principles Board
Opinion No.25, “Accounting for
Stock Issued to Employees,” or APB 25, and related interpretations, as
permitted by SFAS No.123, “Accounting for Stock Based Compensation” (SFAS
123). With the exception of grants of restricted stock awards, we
generally, recorded no stock-based compensation expense during periods prior to
April 1, 2006 as all stock-based grants had exercise prices equal to the fair
market value of our common stock on the date of grant. We also
recorded no compensation expense in connection with our employee stock purchase
plan as they qualified as a non-compensatory plan following the guidance
provided by APB 25.
Effective
April 1, 2006, we adopted the fair value recognition provisions of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised 2004), “Share Based Payment” (SFAS
123R) using the modified prospective transition method. Under that transition
method, we recognized compensation expense of $1,664 for the fiscal year 2007,
and $842 for the nine months ended December 31, 2007, which included: (a)
compensation expense for all share-based payments granted prior to but not yet
vested as of April 1, 2006, based on the grant date fair value estimated in
accordance with the original provisions of SFAS 123, and (b) compensation
expense for all share-based payments granted or modified on or after April 1,
2006, based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the
provisions of SFAS 123R. Compensation expense is recognized only for those
awards that are expected to vest, whereas prior to the adoption of SFAS 123R, we
recognized forfeitures as `they occurred. In addition, we elected the
straight-line attribution method as our accounting policy for recognizing
stock-based compensation expense for all awards that are granted on or after
April 1, 2006. Results in prior periods have not been restated.
Revenue
Recognition
Each sale
of our equipment is evaluated on an individual basis in regard to revenue
recognition. We have integrated in our evaluation the related
interpretative guidance included in Topic 13 of the codification of staff
accounting bulletins, and recognize the role of the Emerging Issues Task Force
(“EITF”) consensus on Issue 00-21. We first refer to EITF 00-21 in
order to determine if there is more than one unit of accounting and then we
refer to SAB104 for revenue recognition topics for the unit of accounting. We
recognize revenue when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, the
seller’s price is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably
assured.
For
products produced according to our published specifications, where no
installation is required or installation is deemed perfunctory and no
substantive customer acceptance provisions exist, revenue is recognized when
title passes to the customer, generally upon shipment. Installation is not
deemed to be essential to the functionality of the equipment since installation
does not involve significant changes to the features or capabilities of the
equipment or building complex interfaces and connections. In
addition, the equipment could be installed by the customer or other vendors and
generally the cost of installation approximates only 1% of the sales value of
the related equipment.
For
products produced according to a particular customer’s specifications, revenue
is recognized when the product has been tested and it has been demonstrated that
it meets the customer’s specifications and title passes to the
customer. The amount of revenue recorded is reduced by the amount
(generally 10%), which is not payable by the customer until installation is
completed and final customer acceptance is achieved.
For new
products, new applications of existing products, or for products with
substantive customer acceptance provisions where performance cannot be fully
assessed prior to meeting customer specifications at the customer site, 100% of
revenue is recognized upon completion of installation and receipt of final
customer acceptance. Since title to goods generally passes to the
customer upon shipment and 90% of the contract amount becomes payable at that
time, inventory is relieved and accounts receivable is recorded for the entire
contract amount. The revenue on these transactions is deferred and
recorded as deferred revenue. We reserve for warranty costs at the
time the related revenue is recognized.
Revenue
related to sales of spare parts is recognized upon shipment. Revenue
related to maintenance and service contracts is recognized ratably over the
duration of the contracts. Unearned maintenance and service revenue
is included in deferred revenue.
Accounts
Receivable – Allowance for Sales Returns and Doubtful Accounts
We
maintain an allowance for doubtful accounts receivable for estimated losses
resulting from the inability of our customers to make required payments. We
consider the aging of individual customer accounts and determine, according to
corporate policy, which accounts should be included in the reserve for doubtful
accounts. If the financial conditions of our customers were to
deteriorate, or even a single customer was otherwise unable to make payments,
additional allowances may be required and may materially affect our consolidated
financial position.
Our
return policy is for spare parts and components only. A right of
return does not exist for systems. Customers are allowed to return
spare parts if they are defective upon receipt. The potential returns are offset
against gross revenue on a monthly basis. Management reviews
outstanding requests for returns on a quarterly basis to determine that the
reserves are adequate.
Inventories
Inventories
are stated at the lower of cost or market, reduced by provisions for excess and
obsolescence. Cost is computed using standard cost, which approximates actual
cost on a first-in, first-out basis and includes material, labor and
manufacturing overhead costs. We estimate the effects of excess and obsolescence
on the carrying values of our inventories based upon estimates of future demand
and market conditions. We establish provisions for related inventories in excess
of production demand. Should actual production demand differ from our estimates,
additional inventory write-downs may be required. Any excess and obsolete
provision is released only if and when the related inventories are sold or
scrapped. The inventory provision balance at December 31, 2007
and March 31, 2007 was $3,760 and $3,908,
respectively. The recovery of previously reserved inventory upon
scrap of such inventory for the nine months ended December 31, 2007 and December
31, 2006 was ($148) and ($3,024),
respectively.
We
periodically analyze any systems that are in finished goods inventory to
determine if they are suitable for current customer requirements. At
the present time, our policy is that, if after approximately 18 months, we
determine that a sale will not take place within the next 12 months, and the
system would be useable for customer demonstrations or training, it is
transferred to fixed assets. Otherwise, it is expensed.
The carrying value of systems used for demonstrations or training is determined
by assessing the cost of the components that are suitable for
sale. Any parts that may be rendered not saleable as a result of such
use are removed from the system and are not included in finished goods
inventory. The remaining saleable parts are valued at the lower of cost or
market, representing the system’s net realizable value. The
depreciation period for systems that are transferred to fixed assets is
determined based on the age of the system and its remaining useful life
(typically five to eight years).
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
Long-lived
assets are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances
indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. If undiscounted
expected future cash flows are less than the carrying value of the assets, an
impairment loss is recognized based on the excess of the carrying amount over
the fair value of the assets.
Warranty
Obligations
We
provide for the estimated cost of our product warranties at the time revenue is
recognized. Our warranty obligation is affected by product failure rates,
material usage rates and the efficiency by which the product failure is
corrected. The warranty reserve is based on historical cost data
related to warranty. Should actual product failure rates, material
usage rates and labor efficiencies differ from our estimates, revisions to the
estimated warranty liability may be required.
Deferred
Taxes
We record
a valuation allowance to reduce our deferred tax assets to the amount that is
more likely than not to be realized. Based on the uncertainty of future taxable
income, we have fully reserved our deferred tax assets. In the event we were to
determine that we would be able to realize our deferred tax assets in the
future, an adjustment to the deferred tax asset would increase income in the
period such determination was made.
Results
of Operations
The
following table sets forth certain financial items as a percentage of revenue
for the three and nine months ended December 31, 2007 and 2006:
|
|
Three
Months
Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
Nine
Months
Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Revenue
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
100.0 |
% |
Cost
of revenue
|
|
|
56.4 |
|
|
|
130.3 |
|
|
|
59.8 |
|
|
|
77.8 |
|
Gross
profit
|
|
|
43.6 |
|
|
|
(30.3 |
) |
|
|
40.2 |
|
|
|
22.2 |
|
Operating
expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development expenses
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
24.6 |
|
|
|
10.3 |
|
|
|
19.5 |
|
Sales
and marketing expenses
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
21.7 |
|
|
|
12.6 |
|
|
|
18.4 |
|
General
and administrative expenses
|
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
|
70.0 |
|
|
|
14.1 |
|
|
|
55.1 |
|
Total
operating expenses
|
|
|
26.3 |
|
|
|
116.3 |
|
|
|
37.0 |
|
|
|
93.0 |
|
Other
income (expense)
net
|
|
|
10.6 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
8.1 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
|
27.9 |
% |
|
|
(139.9 |
%) |
|
|
11.3 |
% |
|
|
(69.8 |
%) |
The
following table sets forth certain financial items for the three and nine months
ended December 31, 2007 and 2006.
|
|
Three
Months
Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
Nine
Months
Ended
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
Revenue
|
|
$ |
10,145 |
|
|
$ |
4,377 |
|
|
$ |
25,543 |
|
|
$ |
16,066 |
|
Cost
of revenue
|
|
|
5,725 |
|
|
|
5,703 |
|
|
|
15,262 |
|
|
|
12,494 |
|
Gross
profit
|
|
|
4,420 |
|
|
|
(1,326 |
) |
|
|
10,281 |
|
|
|
3,572 |
|
Operating
expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research
and development expenses
|
|
|
810 |
|
|
|
1,077 |
|
|
|
2,645 |
|
|
|
3,139 |
|
Sales
and marketing expenses
|
|
|
923 |
|
|
|
949 |
|
|
|
3,208 |
|
|
|
2,957 |
|
General
and administrative expenses
|
|
|
938 |
|
|
|
3,063 |
|
|
|
3,589 |
|
|
|
8,850 |
|
Total
operating expenses
|
|
|
2,671 |
|
|
|
5,089 |
|
|
|
9,442 |
|
|
|
14,946 |
|
Other
income net
|
|
|
1,085 |
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
2,049 |
|
|
|
166 |
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
2,834 |
|
|
$ |
(6,125 |
) |
|
$ |
2,888 |
|
|
$ |
(11,208 |
) |
Net
income per share, basic
|
|
|
0.40 |
|
|
|
(0.86 |
) |
|
|
0.41 |
|
|
|
(1.59 |
) |
Net
income per share, diluted
|
|
|
0.39 |
|
|
|
(0.86 |
) |
|
|
0.40 |
|
|
|
(1.59 |
) |
Number
of shares outstanding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
7,148 |
|
|
|
7,082 |
|
|
|
7,120 |
|
|
|
7,044 |
|
Diluted
|
|
|
7,281 |
|
|
|
7,082 |
|
|
|
7,241 |
|
|
|
7,044 |
|
Revenue
Revenue
for the three months ended December 31, 2007 was $10,145 compared to $4,377 for
the same period last year. Revenue for the nine months ended December
31, 2007 was $25,543 compared to $16,066 for the same period last
year. The increases in revenue for the three and nine months ended
December 31, 2007 as compared to the respective prior year periods were
principally due to the product mix and number of systems sold, as well as to
setting higher selling prices for some of our advanced systems. For
the three months ended December 31, 2007, we sold two new advanced series
systems, two new 900 series systems and one new Endeavor system. For
the three months ended December 31, 2006, we sold one new advanced series system
and one used 900 series system. For the nine months
ended December 31, 2006, we sold one new advanced series and one used advanced
900 series system, For the nine months ended December 31, 2007,
we sold six new advanced series systems and three new 900 series systems, as
well as one new Endeavor system and one used Endeavor
system. For the nine months ended December 31, 2006, we sold
two new advanced series systems, and six new 900 series systems, as well as one
used advanced series system, three used 900 series systems and one used Endeavor
system.
International
sales as a percentage of revenue for the three months ended
December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006 were 67% and 54%, respectively.
International sales as a percentage of revenue for the nine months ended
December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006 were 83% and 64%,
respectively. We believe that international sales will continue to
represent a significant portion of our revenue.
Gross
profit
Gross
profit for the three months ended December 31, 2007 was $4,420, compared to
($1,326) for the same period last year. Gross profit for the nine
months ended December 31, 2007 was $10,281 compared to $3,572 for the
same period last year. The increases in gross profit were due
to the product mix and number of systems sold, as well as to cost reductions in
manufacturing overhead, primarily in payroll expense. Gross
margins for the three months and nine months ended December 31, 2007 were higher
than for the same period last year mainly due to reduction in lead times
beginning in mid-2006 and inventory write-downs in 2006.
Research and
Development
Research
and development (R&D) expenses consist primarily of salaries, prototype
material and other costs associated with our ongoing systems and process
technology development, applications and field process support efforts. R&D
spending for the three months ended December 31, 2007 was $810 as compared to
$1,077 for the prior year period. R&D spending for the nine
months ended December 31, 2007 was $2,645 as compared to $3,139 for the prior
year period. The decrease in spending was due primarily to
reimbursement for prototype costs as well as lower depreciation and legal costs
associated with patents.
Sales and
Marketing
Sales and
marketing expenses consist primarily of salaries, commissions, trade show
promotion and travel and living expenses associated with those functions. Sales
and marketing spending for the three months ended December 31, 2007 and December
31, 2006 were consistent at $923 and $949, respectively. Sales and
marketing spending for the nine months ended December 31, 2007 increased to
$3,208 from $2,957 for the nine months ended December 31, 2006. This
increase represented our efforts to increase world wide sales and increased
commission expense resulting from higher revenues.
General
and Administrative
General
and administrative expenses consist primarily of compensation for general
management, accounting and finance, human resources, information systems and
investor relations functions and for legal, consulting and accounting fees of
the Company. Expenses decreased $2,125 to $938 for the three months
ended December 31, 2007 from $3,063 for the same period last
year. Expenses decreased $5,261 to $3,589 for the nine
months ended December 31, 2007 from $8,850 for the same period last
year. These decreases were primarily due to a reduction in legal fees
as a result of the settlement of the litigation against AMS, Agilent and Avago
Technologies.
Other
income (expense), net
Other
income (expense), net consists principally of, interest income, interest
expense, other income, other expense, gains and losses on the disposal of fixed
assets, and gains and losses on foreign exchange. We recorded other income net
$1,085 for the three months ended December 31, 2007 as compared to $290 for the
same period last year. We recorded other income net of $2,049 for the
nine months ended December 31, 2007 as compared to $166 for the same period last
year. This increase was due primarily to recording $682 from the recognition of
foreign exchange differences between current and historical valuations of
investment as a result of the dissolution of our Japan subsidiary completed in
December 2007. Net interest income is also higher in the
current fiscal year due to higher cash balances earning higher
interest. In addition, we also received $278 from the AMS
settlement in the first quarter of the current fiscal year.
Contractual
obligation
The
following summarizes our contractual obligations at December 31, 2007, and the
effect such obligations are expected to have on our liquidity and cash flows in
future periods:
Contractual
obligations:
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Less
than
1 Year
|
|
|
1-3 Years
|
|
|
3-5 Years
|
|
|
After
5 Years
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cancelable
operating lease obligations
|
|
|
1,000 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
370 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
— |
|
Total
contractual cash
obligations
|
|
$ |
1,000 |
|
|
$ |
602 |
|
|
$ |
370 |
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
|
$ |
— |
|
Certain
of our sales contracts include provisions under which customers would be
indemnified by us in the event of, among other things, a third-party claim
against the customer for intellectual property rights infringement related to
our products. There are no limitations on the maximum potential future payments
under these guarantees. We have accrued no amounts in relation to these
provisions as no such claims have been made and we believe we have valid,
enforceable rights to the intellectual property embedded in its
products.
Liquidity
and Capital Resources
For the nine months ended December 31, 2007, we financed our operations through
the use of outstanding cash balances. The primary significant changes
in our cash flow statement were in Accounts Receivable, Inventories and
Litigation Suspense. Accounts receivable increased as a result of
additional sales made in the second and third quarter of fiscal year
2008. Full payment is not due from these customers until system
installations are complete. The company increased inventories in
anticipation of new sales and increased costs of raw
materials. Litigation Suspense decreased as a result of the
settlement with G&L.
The
consolidated financial statements contemplate the realization of assets and the
satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. We had a net
income (loss) of $2,834 and ($6,125) for the three months ended December 31,
2007 and 2006 respectively. We had a net income (loss) of $2,888 and
($11,208) for the nine months ended December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. We
generated (used) cash flows from operations of ($5,502) and $16,003 for the nine
months ended December 31, 2007 and December 31, 2006, respectively. Our
litigation suspense of $19,500 was reduced by the payment of $995 to settle
claims with G&L resulting in a litigation suspense balance of $18,505 as of
December 31, 2007. In January 2008, we reached settlement of a $3,800
payment to Keker & Van Nest. As a result of this settlement, the
litigation suspense of $14,705 will be released and recorded as other income in
the fourth quarter ending March 31, 2008. For more information, see
Part II, Item 1. Legal Proceedings.
In fiscal
year 2006, we raised a net of $18,161 through the 2005 PIPE. Management believes
that these proceeds and the release of the litigation suspense combined with the
effects of consolidation of certain operations and continued cost containment
will be adequate to fund operations through fiscal year 2009. However, projected
sales may not materialize and unforeseen costs may be incurred. If the projected
sales do not materialize, we will need to reduce expenses further and/or raise
additional capital, which may include capital raises through the issuance of
debt or equity securities. If additional funds are raised through the
issuance of preferred stock or debt these securities could have rights,
privileges or preferences senior to those of common stock. Moreover,
the sale of equity could result in additional dilution to current
stockholders. Covenants associated with our debt securities could
impose restrictions on our operations. Such equity or debt financings
may not be available to us on acceptable terms, if at all. The
consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments relating to the
recoverability and classification of recorded assets or the amount or
classification of liabilities or any other adjustments that might be necessary
should we be unable to continue as a going concern.
Item
3. Quantitative and
Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk
Our cash
equivalents are principally comprised of money market accounts. As of December 31, 2007, we
had cash and cash equivalents of $19,796. These
accounts are subject to interest rate risk and may fall in value if market
interest rates increase. We attempt to limit this exposure by
investing primarily in short-term securities having a maturity of three months
or less. Due to the nature of our cash and cash equivalents, we have
concluded that there is no material market risk exposure.
We have
foreign subsidiaries which operate and sell our products in various global
markets. As a result, we are exposed to changes in foreign currency
exchange rates. We do not hold derivative financial instruments for
speculative purposes. There have been no material changes regarding
market risk since the disclosures made in our Form 10-K for the fiscal year
ended March 31, 2007.
Item
4. Controls
and Procedures
We
maintain disclosure controls and procedures that are designed to ensure that
information required to be disclosed in our Exchange Act reports is recorded,
processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the
SEC’s 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 for timely decisions regarding required
disclosure. In designing and evaluating our disclosure controls and procedures,
our management recognizes that any controls and procedures, no matter how well
designed and operated, can provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the
desired control objectives, and our management is required to apply its judgment
in evaluating the cost-benefit relationship of possible controls and
procedures.
|
(a)
|
Evaluation
of Disclosure Controls and Procedures. - Under the
supervision and with the participation of our management, our Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have evaluated the
effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures, as such term is
defined under Rule 13a-15(e) promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934, as amended. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive
Officer and our Chief Financial Officer concluded that the our disclosure
controls and procedures were effective as of the end of the period covered
by this report.
|
|
(b)
|
Changes in
Internal Controls over financial reporting. - As required by Rule
13a-15(d), our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief
Financial Officer, also conducted an evaluation of our internal control
over financial reporting to determine whether any changes occurred during
the period covered by this report that have materially affected, or are
reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over
financial reporting. Based on that evaluation, there has been no such
change during the period covered by this
report.
|
(c)
|
Limitations
of the effectiveness of internal control. - A
control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide
only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the
internal control system are met. Because of the inherent limitations of
any internal control system, no evaluation of controls can provide
absolute assurance that all control issues, if any, within a company have
been detected. Notwithstanding these limitations, our disclosure controls
and procedures are designed to provide reasonable assurance of achieving
their objectives. Our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures are, in fact,
effective at the “reasonable assurance”
level.
|
PART
II — OTHER INFORMATION
Item
1. Legal
Proceedings
Keker & Van Nest LLP v.
Tegal Corporation and Sputtered Films, Inc.
On
December 22, 2003, Sputtered Films, Inc. ("SFI"), a wholly owned subsidiary of
the Company, filed an action against two former employees, Sergey Mishin and
Rose Stuart-Curran, and a company they formed after leaving their employment
with SFI named Advanced Modular Sputtering, Inc. ("AMS"). Sergey
Mishin and Rose Stuart-Curran had each signed confidentiality and non-disclosure
agreements regarding information obtained while employed by SFI. The
action contains causes of action for specific performance, breach of contract,
breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, misappropriation of trade
secrets, unfair competition, unfair business practices, interference with
prospective economic advantage, conversion, unjust enrichment, and declaratory
relief. These claims arose out of information SFI received evidencing
that AMS possessed and used SFI's confidential, proprietary and trade secret
drawings, specifications and technology to manufacture the sputtering tool
marketed by AMS.
On
November 13, 2006, following commencement of the trial, all the parties in the
litigation agreed on terms of a settlement, which was filed with the
court. Among other things, the settlement called for the transfer of
assets related to PVD technology from AMS to SFI, the dissolution of AMS as of
March 1, 2007 and the assumption by Tegal of certain warranty obligations of
AMS. The Avago Cross-Complaint was also dismissed as part of the
settlement. A final confidential settlement and release of claims was executed
among the parties on December 21, 2006.
The two
law firms representing SFI in this matter claim they were entitled, as a result
of the settlement, to receive contingent fees from Tegal and
SFI. Keker & Van Nest LLP (“KVN”) claimed fees in the
amount of $6,717. Gonzalez & Leigh LLP (“G&L”) claimed fees
in the amount of $2,249. We initiated proceedings with the Bar
Association of San Francisco (“BASF”), pursuant to California statutes, to
dispute the claims of both firms. KVN filed suit in the above-titled
action against us and SFI in San Francisco Superior Court. The action
was stayed pending completion of the BASF proceedings. G&L has
not filed suit. We identified legal and factual defenses to
substantial elements of both claims and vigorously contested the
matter.
As a
result of the dispute described above, as of March 31, 2007, we had placed
$19,500, representing the gross cash proceeds from the recent settlement of this
litigation into suspense. Since the amount in dispute cannot be determined with
reasonable certainty until the dispute was resolved, we elected to suspend the
entire amount, in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
No. 5, “Accounting for
Contingencies.”
Prior to
the September 11, 2007 arbitration, G&L settled its claim against
us for $995, which we paid and the amount was released from the litigation
suspense. On January 16, 2008, we received a Notice of Acceptance of
Written Offer to Compromise from KVN. In connection with KVN’s
acceptance of the Company’s Written Offer to Compromise and the execution of a
mutual general release, dated as of January 18, 2008, we paid KVN $3,800. As a
result, we will eliminate the litigation suspense along with other liabilities
related to the AMS Settlement, and the net proceeds will be recorded as other
income in the fiscal fourth quarter ending March 31, 2008.
Item
1A. Risk
Factors
We
wish to caution you that there are risks and uncertainties that could affect our
business. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the
risks described below and elsewhere in this report, particularly in
“Forward-Looking Statements.” The following is not intended to be a complete
discussion of all potential risks or uncertainties, as it is not possible to
predict or identify all risk factors.
The
semiconductor industry is cyclical and may experience periodic downturns that
may negatively affect customer demand for our products and result in losses such
as those experienced in the past.
Our
business depends upon the capital expenditures of semiconductor manufacturers,
which in turn depend on the current and anticipated market demand for ICs. The
semiconductor industry is highly cyclical and historically has experienced
periodic downturns, which often have had a detrimental effect on the
semiconductor industry’s demand for semiconductor capital equipment, including
etch and deposition systems manufactured by us. In response to the current
prolonged industry slow-down, we have initiated a substantial cost containment
program and have completed a corporate-wide restructuring to preserve our cash.
However, the need for continued investment in research and development, possible
capital equipment requirements and extensive ongoing customer service and
support requirements worldwide will continue to limit our ability to reduce
expenses in response to current and any future downturns. As a
result, we may continue to experience operating losses such as those we have
experienced in the past, which could materially adversely affect
us.
Our
competitors have greater financial resources and greater name recognition than
we do and therefore may compete more successfully in the semiconductor capital
equipment industry than we can.
We
believe that to be competitive, we will require significant financial resources
in order to offer a broad range of systems, to maintain customer service and
support centers worldwide and to invest in research and development. Many of our
existing and potential competitors, including Applied Materials, Inc., Lam
Research Corporation, Novellus and Tokyo Electron Limited, have substantially
greater financial resources, more extensive engineering, manufacturing,
marketing and customer service and support capabilities, larger installed bases
of current generation etch, deposition and other production equipment and
broader process equipment offerings, as well as greater name recognition than we
do. We cannot assure you that we will be able to compete successfully against
these companies in the United States or worldwide.
Our
customers are concentrated and therefore the loss of a significant customer may
harm our business.
The
composition of our top five customers has changed from year to year, but net
system sales to our top five customers in each of fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005
accounted for 77.8%, 68.9% and 80.0% respectively, of our total net system
sales. ST Microelectronics and International Rectifier accounted for 43.1% and
13.4%, respectively, of our total revenue in fiscal 2007. ST
Microelectronics accounted for 54.3% of our total revenue in fiscal
2006. Fujitsu, Western Digital, and RF Micro Devices accounted for
38.2%, 12.8% and 10.1% respectively, of our net system sales in fiscal year
2005. ST Microelectronics and Analog Devices, Inc accounted for 60%
and 21%, respectively of total revenue in the three months ended December 31,
2007. ST Microelectronics accounted for 71% of total revenue in the
nine months ended December 31, 2007. Other than these customers, no
single customer represented more than 10% of our total revenue in fiscal 2007,
2006 and 2005 or the nine months ended December 31, 2007. Although the
composition of the group comprising our largest customers may vary from year to
year, the loss of a significant customer or any reduction in orders by any
significant customer, including reductions due to market, economic or
competitive conditions in the semiconductor and related device manufacturing
industry, may have a material adverse effect on us.
Our
potential customers may not adopt our products because of their significant cost
or because our potential customers are already using a competitor’s
tool.
A
substantial investment is required to install and integrate capital equipment
into a semiconductor production line. Additionally, we believe that once a
device manufacturer has selected a particular vendor’s capital equipment, that
manufacturer generally relies upon that vendor’s equipment for that specific
production line application and, to the extent possible, subsequent generations
of that vendor’s systems. Accordingly, it may be extremely difficult to achieve
significant sales to a particular customer once that customer has selected
another vendor’s capital equipment unless there are compelling reasons to do so,
such as significant performance or cost advantages. Any failure to gain access
and achieve sales to new customers will adversely affect the successful
commercial adoption of our products and could have a detrimental effect on
us.
We
depend on sales of our advanced products to customers that may not fully adopt
our product for production use.
We have
designed our advanced etch and deposition products for customer applications in
emerging new films, polysilicon and metal which we believe to be the leading
edge of critical applications for the production of advanced semiconductor and
other microelectronic devices. Revenues from the sale of our advanced etch and
deposition systems accounted for 69%, 69% and 30% of total revenue in fiscal
2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Our advanced systems are currently being used
primarily for research and development activities or low volume production. For
our advanced systems to achieve full market adoption, our customers must utilize
these systems for volume production. We cannot assure you that the market for
devices incorporating emerging films, polysilicon or metal will develop as
quickly or to the degree we expect. If our advanced systems do not
achieve significant sales or volume production due to a lack of customer
adoption, we will be materially adversely affected.
We
have incurred operating losses and may not be profitable in the future; our
plans to maintain and increase liquidity may not be successful.
We
incurred net losses of $13,200, $8,900 and $15,400 for the years ended March 31,
2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, and generated (used) cash flows from
operations of $12,800, ($11,600), and ($7,500) in these respective
years. We have raised approximately $18,400 from the sale of stock
and warrants to institutional investors in fiscal 2006. In fiscal year 2006, we
raised a net of $18,161 through the 2005 PIPE. We believe that these
proceeds and the release of the litigation suspense, combined with the effects
of consolidation of operations and continued cost containment will be adequate
to fund operations through fiscal year 2009. However projected sales
may not materialize and unforeseen costs may be incurred. If the
projected sales do not materialize, we will need to reduce expenses further
and/or raise additional capital which may include capital raises through the
issuance of debt or equity securities. If additional funds are raised
through the issuance of preferred stock or debt, these securities could have
rights, privileges or preferences senior to those of common
stock. Moreover, the sale of equity could result in additional
dilution to current stockholders. Covenants associated with our debt
securities could impose restrictions on our operations. Such equity
or debt financings may not be available to us on acceptable terms, if at
all. Moreover, such financing may not be available to us on
acceptable terms, if at all. Failure to raise any needed funds would
materially adversely affect us.
Our
quarterly operating results may continue to fluctuate.
Our
revenue and operating results have fluctuated and are likely to continue to
fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter, and we cannot assure you that
we will achieve profitability in the future.
Our
900-series etch systems typically sell for prices ranging between $250,000 and
$600,000, while prices of our 6500-series critical etch systems and our Endeavor
deposition system typically range between $1.8 million and $3.0 million. To the
extent we are successful in selling our 6500 and Endeavor series systems, the
sale of a small number of these systems will probably account for a substantial
portion of revenue in future quarters, and a transaction for a single system
could have a substantial impact on revenue and gross margin for a given
quarter.
Other
factors that could affect our quarterly operating results include:
·
|
our
timing of new systems and technology announcements and releases and
ability to transition between product
versions;
|
·
|
seasonal
fluctuations in sales;
|
·
|
changes
in the mix of our revenues represented by our various products and
customers;
|
·
|
adverse
changes in the level of economic activity in the United States or other
major economies in which we do
business;
|
·
|
foreign
currency exchange rate
fluctuations;
|
·
|
expenses
related to, and the financial impact of, possible acquisitions of other
businesses; and
|
·
|
changes
in the timing of product orders due to unexpected delays in the
introduction of our customers’ products, due to lifecycles of our
customers’ products ending earlier than expected or due to market
acceptance of our customers’
products.
|
Some
of our sales cycles are lengthy, exposing us to the risks of inventory
obsolescence and fluctuations in operating results.
Sales of
our systems depend, in significant part, upon the decision of a prospective
customer to add new manufacturing capacity or to expand existing manufacturing
capacity, both of which typically involve a significant capital commitment. We
often experience delays in finalizing system sales following initial system
qualification while the customer evaluates and receives approvals for the
purchase of our systems and completes a new or expanded facility. Due to these
and other factors, our systems typically have a lengthy sales cycle (often 12 to
18 months in the case of critical etch and deposition systems) during which we
may expend substantial funds and management effort. Lengthy sales cycles subject
us to a number of significant risks, including inventory obsolescence and
fluctuations in operating results over which we have little or no
control.
Because
technology changes rapidly, we may not be able to introduce our products in a
timely manner.
The
semiconductor manufacturing industry is subject to rapid technological change
and new system introductions and enhancements. We believe that our future
success depends on our ability to continue to enhance our existing systems and
their process capabilities, and to develop and manufacture in a timely manner
new systems with improved process capabilities. We may incur substantial
unanticipated costs to ensure product functionality and reliability early in our
products’ life cycles. We cannot assure you that we will be successful in the
introduction and volume manufacture of new systems or that we will be able to
develop and introduce, in a timely manner, new systems or enhancements to our
existing systems and processes which satisfy customer needs or achieve market
adoption.
Our
financial performance may adversely affect the morale and performance of our
personnel and our ability to hire new personnel.
Our
common stock has recently decreased in value compared to the exercise price of
many options granted to employees pursuant to our stock option
plans. Thus, the intended benefits of the stock options granted to
our employees, the creation of performance and retention incentives, may not be
realized. As a result, we may lose employees whom we would prefer to
retain and may have difficulty in hiring new employees to replace them. As a
result of these factors, our remaining personnel may seek employment with
larger, more established companies or companies perceived as having less
volatile stock prices. The loss of any significant employee or a
large number of employees over a short period of time could have a material
adverse effect on us.
We
may not be able to protect our intellectual property or obtain licenses for
third parties’ intellectual property and therefore we may be exposed to
liability for infringement or the risk that our operations may be adversely
affected.
Although
we attempt to protect our intellectual property rights through patents,
copyrights, trade secrets and other measures, we may not be able to protect our
technology adequately and competitors may be able to develop similar technology
independently. Additionally, patent applications that we may file may not be
issued and foreign intellectual property laws may not protect our intellectual
property rights. There is also a risk that patents licensed by or issued to us
will be challenged, invalidated or circumvented and that the rights granted
there under will not provide competitive advantages to us. Furthermore, others
may independently develop similar systems, duplicate our systems or design
around the patents licensed by or issued to us.
Litigation
to protect our intellectual property could result in substantial cost and
diversion of effort by us, which by itself could have a material adverse effect
on our financial condition, operating results and cash flows. Further, adverse
determinations in such litigation could result in our loss of proprietary
rights, subject us to significant liabilities to third parties, require us to
seek licenses from third parties or prevent us from manufacturing or selling our
systems. In addition, licenses under third parties’ intellectual property rights
may not be available on reasonable terms, if at all.
We
are exposed to additional risks associated with international sales and
operations.
International
sales accounted for 67%, 76%, and 70% of total revenue for fiscal 2007, 2006,
and 2005, respectively. For the nine months ended December 31, 2007,
international sales accounted for approximately 83% of total revenue.
International sales are subject to certain risks, including the imposition of
government controls, fluctuations in the U.S. dollar (which could increase the
sales price in local currencies of our systems in foreign markets), changes in
export license and other regulatory requirements, tariffs and other market
barriers, political and economic instability, potential hostilities,
restrictions on the export or import of technology, difficulties in accounts
receivable collection, difficulties in managing representatives, difficulties in
staffing and managing international operations and potentially adverse tax
consequences. We cannot assure you that any of these factors will not have a
detrimental effect on our operations, financial results and cash
flows.
We cannot
assure you that our future results of operations and cash flows will not be
adversely affected by foreign currency fluctuations. In addition, the laws of
certain countries in which our products are sold may not provide our products
and intellectual property rights with the same degree of protection as the laws
of the United States.
Evolving
regulation of corporate governance and public disclosure may result in
additional expenses and continuing uncertainty.
Changing
laws, regulations and standard relating to corporate governance and public
disclosure, including the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, new Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”) regulations and Nasdaq Stock Market rules are
creating uncertainty for public companies. We continually evaluate and monitor
developments with respect to new and proposed rules and cannot predict or
estimate the amount of the additional costs we may incur or the timing of such
costs. These new or changed laws, regulations and standards are subject to
varying interpretations, in many cases due to their lack of specificity, and as
a result, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance is
provided by regulatory and governing bodies. This could result in continuing
uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by
ongoing revisions to disclosure and governance practices. We are committed to
maintaining high standards of corporate governance and public disclosure. As a
result, we have invested resources to comply with evolving laws, regulations and
standards, and this investment may result in increased general and
administrative expenses and a diversion of management time and attention from
revenue-generating activities to compliance activities. If our efforts to comply
with new or changed laws, regulations and standards differ from the activities
intended by regulatory or governing bodies due to ambiguities related to
practice, regulatory authorities may initiate legal proceedings against us and
we may be materially adversely affected.
Our
stock price is volatile and could result in a material decline in the value of
your investment in Tegal.
We
believe that factors such as announcements of developments related to our
business, fluctuations in our operating results, sales of our common stock into
the marketplace, failure to meet or changes in analysts’ expectations, general
conditions in the semiconductor industry or the worldwide economy, announcements
of technological innovations or new products or enhancements by us or our
competitors, developments in patents or other intellectual property rights,
developments in our relationships with our customers and suppliers, natural
disasters and outbreaks of hostilities could cause the price of our common stock
to fluctuate substantially. In addition, in recent years the stock market in
general, and the market for shares of small capitalization stocks in particular,
have experienced extreme price fluctuations, which have often been unrelated to
the operating performance of affected companies. We cannot assure you that the
market price of our common stock will not experience significant fluctuations in
the future, including fluctuations that are unrelated to our
performance.
The
exercise of outstanding warrants, options and other rights to obtain additional
shares will dilute the value of our shares of common stock and could cause the
price of our shares of common stock to decline.
As of
December 31, 2007, there were 7,202,288
shares of our common stock issued and outstanding and there were 1,794,880
shares of common stock reserved for issuance under our equity incentive
and stock purchase plans. As of the same date, there were warrants
outstanding for approximately 1,695,145 shares of
our common stock.
The
exercise of these warrants and options and the issuance of the common stock
pursuant to our equity incentive plans will result in dilution in the value of
the shares of our outstanding common stock and the voting power represented
thereby. In addition, the exercise price of the warrants may be lowered under
the price adjustment provisions in the event of a “dilutive issuance,” that is,
if we issue common stock at any time prior to their maturity at a per share
price below such conversion or exercise price, either directly or in connection
with the issuance of securities that are convertible into, or exercisable for,
shares of our common stock. A reduction in the exercise price may result in the
issuance of a significant number of additional shares upon the exercise of the
warrants.
The
outstanding warrants do not establish a “floor” that would limit reductions in
such conversion price or exercise price. The downward adjustment of
the exercise price of these warrants could result in further dilution in the
value of the shares of our outstanding common stock and the voting power
represented thereby.
No
prediction can be made as to the effect, if any, that future sales of shares of
our common stock, or the availability of shares for future sale, will have on
the market price of our common stock prevailing from time to time. Sales of
substantial amounts of shares of our common stock in the public market, or the
perception that such sales could occur, may adversely affect the market price of
our common stock and may make it more difficult for us to sell our equity
securities in the future at a time and price which we deem
appropriate.
To the
extent our stockholders and the other holders of our warrants and options
exercise such securities and then sell the shares of our common stock they
receive upon exercise, our stock price may decrease due to the additional amount
of shares available in the market. The subsequent sales of these shares could
encourage short sales by our security holders and others, which could place
further downward pressure on our stock price. Moreover, holders of these
warrants and options may hedge their positions in our common stock by shorting
our common stock, which could further adversely affect our stock
price.
Potential
disruption of our supply of materials required to build our systems could have a
negative effect on our operations and damage our customer
relationships.
Materials
delays have not been significant in recent years. Nevertheless, we procure
certain components and sub-assemblies included in our systems from a limited
group of suppliers, and occasionally from a single source supplier. For example,
we depend on MECS Corporation, a robotic equipment supplier, as the sole source
for the robotic arm used in all of our 6500 series systems. We currently have no
existing supply contract with MECS Corporation, and we currently purchase all
robotic assemblies from MECS Corporation on a purchase order basis. Disruption
or termination of certain of these sources, including our robotic sub-assembly
source, could have an adverse effect on our operations and damage our
relationship with our customers.
Any
failure by us to comply with environmental regulations imposed on us could
subject us to future liabilities.
We are
subject to a variety of governmental regulations related to the use, storage,
handling, discharge or disposal of toxic, volatile or otherwise hazardous
chemicals used in our manufacturing process. We believe that we are currently in
compliance in all material respects with these regulations and that we have
obtained all necessary environmental permits generally relating to the discharge
of hazardous wastes to conduct our business. Nevertheless, our failure to comply
with present or future regulations could result in additional or corrective
operating costs, suspension of production, alteration of our manufacturing
processes or cessation of our operations.
31.1
|
Certifications
of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
31.2
|
Certifications
of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
|
32
|
Certifications
of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002.
|
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.
|
TEGAL
CORPORATION
(Registrant)
|
|
|
|
/s/ CHRISTINE
HERGENROTHER
Christine
Hergenrother
Chief
Financial Officer
|
Dated:
February 14 , 2008
|
|
EXHIBIT
31.1
CERTIFICATION
OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT
TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I, Thomas
R. Mika, certify that:
1.
|
I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Tegal
Corporation;
|
2.
|
Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;
|
3.
|
Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
|
4.
|
The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-14(e)) for the registrant
and we have:
|
|
(a)
|
designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;
|
|
(b)
|
evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period
covered by this report based on such
evaluation;
|
|
(c) disclosed in this report
any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting
that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in
the case
of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely
to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting; and
|
5.
|
The
registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):
|
|
(a)
|
all
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information;
and
|
|
(b)
|
any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal
controls over financial reporting.
|
Date: February
14,
2008 /s/ Thomas
R.
Mika
Chief Executive
Officer and President
EXHIBIT
31.2
CERTIFICATION
OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT
TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
I,
Christine Hergenrother, certify that:
1.
|
I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Tegal
Corporation;
|
2.
|
Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
report;
|
3.
|
Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;
|
4.
|
The
registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-14(e)) for the registrant
and we have:
|
|
(a)
|
designed
such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
entities, particularly during the period in which this report
is being prepared;
|
|
(b)
|
evaluated
the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period
covered by this report based on such
evaluation;
|
|
(c)
|
disclosed
in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial
reporting; and
|
5.
|
The
registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s
board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):
|
|
(a)
|
all
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial information;
and
|
|
(b)
|
any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal
controls over financial reporting.
|
Date:
February 14,
2008
/s/ Christine
Hergenrother
Chief Financial
Officer
EXHIBIT
32
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
In connection with the Quarterly Report
of Tegal Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the “Report”), I, Thomas R. Mika, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to my knowledge:
(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
(2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
/s/ Thomas
R.
Mika
Chief
Executive Officer and President
February
14, 2008
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)
In connection with the Quarterly Report
of Tegal Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the “Report”), I, Christine Hergenrother, Chief Financial Officer of
the Company, certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. § 1350), that to my knowledge:
(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
(2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
/s/ Christine
Hergenrother
Chief
Financial Officer
February
14, 2008