e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-Q
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2007
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 0-26820
CRAY INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Washington
|
|
93-0962605 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
|
|
(I.R.S. Employer |
incorporation or organization)
|
|
Identification No.) |
411 First Avenue South, Suite 600
Seattle, WA 98104-2860
(206) 701- 2000
(Address of principal executive offices)
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed
by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or
for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant 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:
o Large accelerated filer þ Accelerated filer o Non- accelerated
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of
the Exchange Act).
Yes o No þ
As of July 30, 2007, 32,572,196 shares of the Companys Common Stock, par value $0.01 per
share, were outstanding.
\
CRAY INC.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Available Information
Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on
Form 8-K, amendments to those reports and proxy statements filed or furnished pursuant to
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act are available free of charge at our
website at www.cray.com as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such
reports with the SEC.
Cray is a federally registered trademark of Cray Inc., and Cray X1, Cray X1E, Cray XT3,
Cray XT4, Cray XMT and Cray XD1 are trademarks of Cray Inc. Other trademarks used in this
report are the property of their respective owners.
1
PART I. FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Item 1. Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
CRAY INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(Unaudited and in thousands, except share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
$ |
48,335 |
|
|
$ |
115,328 |
|
Restricted cash |
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
Short-term investments, available-for-sale |
|
|
51,163 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net |
|
|
24,599 |
|
|
|
44,790 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
61,950 |
|
|
|
58,798 |
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
4,635 |
|
|
|
2,156 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets |
|
|
215,682 |
|
|
|
246,072 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property and equipment, net |
|
|
19,697 |
|
|
|
21,564 |
|
Service inventory, net |
|
|
3,707 |
|
|
|
4,292 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
61,503 |
|
|
|
57,138 |
|
Deferred tax asset |
|
|
770 |
|
|
|
722 |
|
Intangible assets, net |
|
|
1,309 |
|
|
|
1,404 |
|
Other non-current assets |
|
|
6,000 |
|
|
|
6,311 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL ASSETS |
|
$ |
308,668 |
|
|
$ |
337,503 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable |
|
$ |
18,686 |
|
|
$ |
22,450 |
|
Accrued payroll and related expenses |
|
|
11,944 |
|
|
|
17,411 |
|
Advance research and development payments |
|
|
8,899 |
|
|
|
21,518 |
|
Other accrued liabilities |
|
|
5,515 |
|
|
|
5,121 |
|
Deferred revenue |
|
|
37,808 |
|
|
|
43,248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities |
|
|
82,852 |
|
|
|
109,748 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term deferred revenue |
|
|
1,589 |
|
|
|
2,475 |
|
Other non-current liabilities |
|
|
3,526 |
|
|
|
3,906 |
|
Convertible notes payable |
|
|
80,000 |
|
|
|
80,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES |
|
|
167,967 |
|
|
|
196,129 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and Contingencies |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock Authorized and undesignated,
5,000,000 shares; no shares issued or
outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock and additional paid in capital, par
value $.01 per share Authorized, 75,000,000
shares; issued and outstanding, 32,547,950 and
32,236,888 shares, respectively |
|
|
511,372 |
|
|
|
507,356 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
9,391 |
|
|
|
6,855 |
|
Accumulated deficit |
|
|
(380,062 |
) |
|
|
(372,837 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
140,701 |
|
|
|
141,374 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
$ |
308,668 |
|
|
$ |
337,503 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes
2
CRAY INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(Unaudited and in thousands, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Revenue: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product |
|
$ |
13,789 |
|
|
$ |
24,647 |
|
|
$ |
47,449 |
|
|
$ |
58,916 |
|
Service |
|
|
12,836 |
|
|
|
13,866 |
|
|
|
26,285 |
|
|
|
28,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
|
26,625 |
|
|
|
38,513 |
|
|
|
73,734 |
|
|
|
87,028 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of revenue: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of product revenue |
|
|
8,227 |
|
|
|
18,099 |
|
|
|
31,804 |
|
|
|
44,776 |
|
Cost of service revenue |
|
|
7,660 |
|
|
|
7,901 |
|
|
|
15,658 |
|
|
|
15,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total cost of revenue |
|
|
15,887 |
|
|
|
26,000 |
|
|
|
47,462 |
|
|
|
60,370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin |
|
|
10,738 |
|
|
|
12,513 |
|
|
|
26,272 |
|
|
|
26,658 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development, net |
|
|
8,859 |
|
|
|
6,371 |
|
|
|
16,739 |
|
|
|
13,586 |
|
Sales and marketing |
|
|
5,123 |
|
|
|
5,682 |
|
|
|
10,391 |
|
|
|
10,667 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
3,822 |
|
|
|
4,600 |
|
|
|
8,102 |
|
|
|
10,194 |
|
Restructuring and severance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
549 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
1,287 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating expenses |
|
|
17,804 |
|
|
|
17,202 |
|
|
|
35,242 |
|
|
|
35,734 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from operations |
|
|
(7,066 |
) |
|
|
(4,689 |
) |
|
|
(8,970 |
) |
|
|
(9,076 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense), net |
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
(1,831 |
) |
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
(1,872 |
) |
Interest income (expense), net |
|
|
966 |
|
|
|
(441 |
) |
|
|
1,999 |
|
|
|
(1,049 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(6,024 |
) |
|
|
(6,961 |
) |
|
|
(6,500 |
) |
|
|
(11,997 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for income taxes |
|
|
360 |
|
|
|
212 |
|
|
|
725 |
|
|
|
481 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(6,384 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,173 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,225 |
) |
|
$ |
(12,478 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted net loss per share |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.32 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.23 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.56 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic and diluted weighted average shares outstanding |
|
|
31,635 |
|
|
|
22,451 |
|
|
|
31,560 |
|
|
|
22,395 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See accompanying notes
3
CRAY INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited and in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(7,225 |
) |
|
$ |
(12,478 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
6,383 |
|
|
|
8,751 |
|
Share-based compensation cost |
|
|
1,972 |
|
|
|
999 |
|
Inventory write-down |
|
|
156 |
|
|
|
383 |
|
Amortization of issuance costs, convertible notes payable and line of credit |
|
|
344 |
|
|
|
676 |
|
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable |
|
|
19,147 |
|
|
|
12,836 |
|
Inventory |
|
|
(6,677 |
) |
|
|
(13,589 |
) |
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |
|
|
(2,561 |
) |
|
|
(944 |
) |
Other non-current assets |
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
(173 |
) |
Service inventory |
|
|
|
|
|
|
22 |
|
Accounts payable |
|
|
(3,889 |
) |
|
|
7,745 |
|
Accrued payroll and related expenses and other accrued liabilities |
|
|
(5,079 |
) |
|
|
(634 |
) |
Advance research and development payments |
|
|
(12,619 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other non-current liabilities |
|
|
(393 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Deferred revenue |
|
|
(6,534 |
) |
|
|
(5,773 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in operating activities |
|
|
(17,057 |
) |
|
|
(2,214 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales/maturities of short-term investments |
|
|
12,850 |
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of short-term investments |
|
|
(63,668 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of investment |
|
|
|
|
|
|
239 |
|
Purchases of property and equipment |
|
|
(644 |
) |
|
|
(1,475 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(51,462 |
) |
|
|
(1,236 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from issuance of common stock through employee stock purchase plan |
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
288 |
|
Proceeds from exercise of options |
|
|
1,271 |
|
|
|
880 |
|
Line of credit issuance costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(375 |
) |
Principal payments on capital leases |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by financing activities |
|
|
1,486 |
|
|
|
734 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of foreign exchange rate changes on cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
(66,993 |
) |
|
|
(2,654 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of period |
|
|
115,328 |
|
|
|
46,026 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period |
|
$ |
48,335 |
|
|
$ |
43,372 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid for interest |
|
$ |
1,200 |
|
|
$ |
1,880 |
|
Non-cash investing and financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inventory transfers to fixed assets and service inventory |
|
$ |
3,369 |
|
|
$ |
2,275 |
|
Stock issued for 401(k) match |
|
$ |
527 |
|
|
$ |
394 |
|
See accompanying notes
4
CRAY INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Unaudited)
Note 1 Basis of Presentation
In these Notes, Cray Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries are collectively referred
to as the Company. In the opinion of management, the accompanying Condensed Consolidated
Balance Sheets and related Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Statements of
Cash Flows have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in
the United States of America (GAAP) for interim financial information and with the
instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include
all of the information and notes required by GAAP for complete financial statements.
Management believes that all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring adjustments)
considered necessary for fair presentation have been included. Interim results are not
necessarily indicative of results for a full year. The information included in this Form
10-Q should be read in conjunction with Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations and the financial statements and notes thereto included
in the Companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006, as
amended (as so amended, the 2006 Form 10-K).
The Companys revenue, results of operations and cash balances are likely to fluctuate
significantly from quarter-to-quarter. These fluctuations are due to such factors as the
high average sales prices and limited number of sales of the Companys products, the timing
of purchase orders and product deliveries, the revenue recognition accounting policy of
generally not recognizing product revenue until customer acceptance and other contractual
provisions have been fulfilled and the timing of payments for product sales, maintenance
services, government research and development funding and purchases of inventory. Given the
nature of the Companys business, its revenue, receivables and other related accounts are
likely to be concentrated among a few customers.
During the six months ended June 30, 2007, the Company incurred a net loss of $7.2
million and used $17.1 million of cash in operating activities. The Company had $132.8
million of working capital as of June 30, 2007.
Managements plans project that the Companys current cash resources will be adequate
to meet the Companys liquidity needs for at least the next twelve months. These plans
assume sales, shipment, acceptance and subsequent collections from several large customers,
as well as cash receipts on new bookings. There can be no assurance the Company will be
successful in its efforts to achieve future profitable operations or generate sufficient
cash from operations.
Principles of Consolidation
The accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of
Cray Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. All material intercompany accounts and
transactions have been eliminated.
Reclassifications
Certain prior-period amounts have been reclassified to conform with the current-period
presentation. There has been no impact on previously reported net loss or shareholders
equity.
Use of Estimates
Preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and
accompanying notes. These estimates are based on managements best knowledge of current
events and actions the Company may undertake in the future. Estimates are used in accounting
for, among other items, fair value determination used in revenue recognition, percentage of
completion accounting, estimates of proportional performance on co-funded engineering
contracts, determination of inventory at the lower of cost or market, useful lives for
depreciation and amortization, determination of future cash flows associated with impairment
testing for goodwill and long-lived assets, determination of the fair value of stock
options, estimation of restructuring costs, calculation of deferred income tax assets,
potential income tax assessments and other
5
contingencies. The Company bases its estimates on historical experience, current
conditions and on other assumptions that it believes to be reasonable under the
circumstances. Actual results could differ from those estimates and assumptions.
Note 2 Summary of New Accounting Policies
Short-term investments
Investments generally mature between three months and two years from the purchase date.
Investments with maturities beyond one year are classified as short-term based on their
highly liquid nature and because such marketable securities are readily convertible into
cash which could be used in current operations. All short-term investments are classified as
available-for-sale and are recorded at fair value, based on quoted market prices; as such,
unrealized gains and losses are reflected in other comprehensive income, pursuant to the
requirements of Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Statement No. 115, Accounting
for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, (FAS 115).
Note 3 Recent Accounting Developments
In June 2007, the Emerging Issues Task Force of the FASB issued EITF Issue No. 07-3,
Accounting for Nonrefundable Advance Payments for Goods or Services to be Used in Future
Research and Development Activities, (EITF 07-3) which is effective for fiscal years
beginning after December 15, 2007. EITF 07-3 requires that nonrefundable advance payments
for future research and development activities be deferred and capitalized. Such amounts
will be recognized as an expense as the goods are delivered or the related services are
performed. The Company does not expect the adoption of EITF 07-3 to have a material impact
on the financial results of the Company.
Note 4 Earnings Per Share (EPS)
Basic EPS is computed by dividing net income available to common shareholders by the
weighted average number of common shares, including exchangeable shares but excluding
unvested restricted stock, outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS is computed by
dividing net income available to common shareholders by the weighted average number of
common and potential common shares outstanding during the period, which includes the
additional dilution related to conversion of stock options, unvested restricted stock and
common stock purchase warrants as computed under the treasury stock method and the common
shares issuable upon conversion of the outstanding convertible notes.
For the three and six months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006, outstanding stock options,
unvested stock grants, warrants and shares issuable upon conversion of the convertible notes
were antidilutive because of net losses and, as such, their effect has not been included in
the calculation of basic or diluted net loss per share. For the three and six month periods
ended June 30, 2007, potential gross common shares of 11.0 million were antidilutive and not
included in computing diluted EPS. For the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2006,
potential gross common shares of 11.3 million were antidilutive and not included in
computing diluted EPS.
Note 5 Comprehensive Loss
The components of comprehensive loss were as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(6,384 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,173 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,225 |
) |
|
$ |
(12,478 |
) |
Unrealized loss on available-for-sale investments |
|
|
(64 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Unrealized losses on hedged transactions |
|
|
(1,482 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,770 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
|
|
4,025 |
|
|
|
2,088 |
|
|
|
4,353 |
|
|
|
2,160 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive loss |
|
$ |
(3,905 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,085 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,689 |
) |
|
$ |
(10,318 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
Note 6 Accounts Receivable
Net accounts receivable consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Trade accounts receivable |
|
$ |
13,129 |
|
|
$ |
39,417 |
|
Unbilled receivables |
|
|
5,625 |
|
|
|
4,045 |
|
Other receivables |
|
|
4,931 |
|
|
|
349 |
|
Advance billings |
|
|
1,247 |
|
|
|
1,078 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,932 |
|
|
|
44,889 |
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts |
|
|
(333 |
) |
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts receivable, net. |
|
$ |
24,599 |
|
|
$ |
44,790 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of June 30, 2007, and December 31, 2006, accounts receivable included $9.1 million
and $34.7 million, respectively, due from U.S. government agencies and customers serving the
U.S. government. Of this amount, $4.0 million was unbilled in each period, based upon
contractual billing arrangements with these customers. Other receivables included amounts
due from vendors, various foreign government agencies for value added tax paid and interest
on the Companys short-term investments.
The Company makes estimates of allowances for potential future uncollectible amounts
related to current period revenues of products and services. The allowance for doubtful
accounts is an estimate that considers actual facts and circumstances of individual
customers and other debtors, such as financial condition and historical payment trends.
Management evaluates the adequacy of the allowance utilizing a combination of specific
identification of potentially problematic accounts and identification of accounts that have
exceeded payment terms.
Note 7 Inventory
Inventory consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Components and subassemblies |
|
$ |
22,117 |
|
|
$ |
22,536 |
|
Work in process |
|
|
12,817 |
|
|
|
15,310 |
|
Finished goods |
|
|
27,016 |
|
|
|
20,952 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
61,950 |
|
|
$ |
58,798 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At both June 30, 2007, and December 31, 2006, the majority of finished goods inventory
was located at customer sites pending acceptance.
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2007, the Company wrote off $8,000 and
$156,000 of inventory, respectively, and during the three and six months ended June 30,
2006, the Company wrote off $266,000 and $383,000 of inventory, respectively, primarily
related to scrap, excess or obsolete inventory of the Cray XT3 and Cray XD1 products, which
the Company is phasing out.
Note 8 Deferred Revenue
Deferred revenue consisted of the following (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Deferred product revenue |
|
$ |
24,988 |
|
|
$ |
26,993 |
|
Deferred service revenue |
|
|
14,409 |
|
|
|
18,730 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred revenue |
|
|
39,397 |
|
|
|
45,723 |
|
Less long-term deferred revenue |
|
|
(1,589 |
) |
|
|
(2,475 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred revenue in current liabilities |
|
$ |
37,808 |
|
|
$ |
43,248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
As of June 30, 2007, two customers accounted for 52% of total deferred revenue. As of
December 31, 2006, one customer accounted for 42% of total deferred revenue.
Note 9 Restructuring and Severance Charges
During the three and six months ended June 30, 2006, the Company recognized
restructuring and severance charges of $549,000 and $1.3 million, respectively, all of which
originated from actions arising during 2005; there were no new actions taken during 2006 or
2007.
The current portion of restructuring and severance liability is included within
Accrued payroll and related expenses on the accompanying Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheets. The liability activity related to restructuring for the six months ended June 30,
2007 and 2006 was as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Balance, January 1 |
|
$ |
1,063 |
|
|
$ |
3,582 |
|
Payments |
|
|
(285 |
) |
|
|
(1,429 |
) |
Adjustments to previously accrued amounts |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
107 |
|
Current period charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
631 |
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liability balance, March 31 |
|
|
790 |
|
|
|
2,927 |
|
Payments |
|
|
(116 |
) |
|
|
(723 |
) |
Adjustments to previously accrued amounts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Current period charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
552 |
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liability balance, June 30 |
|
|
675 |
|
|
|
2,795 |
|
Less long-term restructuring and severance liability |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(181 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current restructuring and severance liability |
|
$ |
675 |
|
|
$ |
2,614 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note 10 Share-Based Compensation
The Company accounts for its share-based compensation under the provisions of FASB
Statement No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment, (FAS 123R).
The fair value of unvested stock grants is based on the price of a share of the
Companys common stock on the date of grant. However, in determining the fair value of stock
options, the Company uses the Black-Scholes option pricing model that employs the following
key assumptions:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
Risk-free interest rate |
|
|
4.7 |
% |
|
|
4.8 |
% |
|
|
4.7 |
% |
|
|
4.6 |
% |
Expected dividend yield |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Volatility |
|
|
73 |
% |
|
|
76 |
% |
|
|
73 |
% |
|
|
64 |
% |
Expected life |
|
4.0 years |
|
4.0 years |
|
4.0 years |
|
4.3 years |
Weighted
average Black-Scholes value of
options granted |
|
$ |
4.57 |
|
|
$ |
4.39 |
|
|
$ |
6.28 |
|
|
$ |
4.43 |
|
The risk-free interest rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the
time of grant. The Company does not anticipate declaring dividends in the foreseeable
future. Volatility is based on adjusted historical data. The expected term of an option is
based on the assumption that options will be exercised, on average, about two years after
vesting occurs. FAS 123R also requires that the Company recognize compensation expense for
only the portion of options or stock units that are expected to vest. Therefore, management
applies an estimated forfeiture rate that is derived from historical employee termination
data and adjusted for expected future employee turnover rates. The estimated forfeiture rate
for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2007 was 5%
and 9%, respectively, and 10%
for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2006. If the actual number of forfeitures
differs from those estimated by management, additional adjustments to compensation expense
may be required in future periods. The Companys stock price volatility, option lives and
expected forfeiture rates involve managements best estimates at
8
the time of such determination, all of which impact the fair value of the option
calculated under the Black-Scholes methodology and, ultimately, the expense that will be
recognized over the life of the option. The Company typically issues stock options with a
four-year vesting period (defined by FAS 123R as the requisite service period). The Company
amortizes stock compensation cost ratably over the requisite service period.
The Company also has an employee stock purchase plan (ESPP) which allows employees to
purchase shares of the Companys common stock at 95% of fair market value on the fourth
business day after the end of each offering period. The ESPP is deemed non-compensatory and
therefore is not subject to the provisions of FAS 123R.
The following table sets forth the share-based compensation cost resulting from stock
options and unvested stock grants that was recorded in our Condensed Consolidated Statements
of Operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006 (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Cost of product revenue |
|
$ |
28 |
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
55 |
|
|
$ |
29 |
|
Cost of service revenue |
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development, net |
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
644 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
Sales and marketing |
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
273 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
General and administrative |
|
|
438 |
|
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
913 |
|
|
|
573 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
950 |
|
|
$ |
518 |
|
|
$ |
1,972 |
|
|
$ |
999 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A summary of the Companys year-to-date stock option activity and related
information follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
Remaining |
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise |
|
Contractual |
|
Intrinsic |
|
|
Options |
|
Price |
|
Term |
|
Value |
Outstanding at December 31, 2006 |
|
|
3,867,415 |
|
|
$ |
14.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grants |
|
|
22,000 |
|
|
|
10.88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercises |
|
|
(162,783 |
) |
|
|
7.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cancellations |
|
|
(121,786 |
) |
|
|
19.93 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at June 30, 2007 |
|
|
3,604,846 |
|
|
$ |
14.79 |
|
|
6.3 years |
|
$ |
1,304,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercisable at June 30, 2007 |
|
|
2,884,535 |
|
|
$ |
15.85 |
|
|
5.5 years |
|
$ |
1,301,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for grant at June 30, 2007 |
|
|
2,358,516 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The aggregate intrinsic value in the table above represents the total pretax intrinsic
value for all in-the-money options (i.e., the difference between the Companys closing
stock price on the last trading day of its second quarter of 2007 and the exercise price,
multiplied by the number of shares) that would have been received by the option holders had
all option holders exercised their options on June 30, 2007. This amount changes, based on
the fair market value of the Companys stock. Total intrinsic value of options exercised was
$196,000 and $877,000, respectively, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2007.
For
the three and six months ended June 30, 2007, 55,501 shares of
unvested restricted stock were granted by the Company and
restrictions lapsed on an aggregate of 511,733 and 516,963 shares,
respectively, of formerly restricted stock. As of June 30, 2007,
unvested restricted shares totaled 384,781.
As of June 30, 2007 and 2006, the Company had $7.2 million and $2.4 million,
respectively, of total unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested stock options and
unvested stock grants, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of
3.3 years and 1.2 years, respectively.
9
Note 11 Taxes
The Company recorded a tax provision of $360,000 and $725,000 for the three and six
months ended June 30, 2007, respectively, and $212,000 and $481,000 for the three and six
month periods ended June 30, 2006, respectively. The expense recorded for both three and six
month periods was related to foreign and certain state income taxes payable.
In June 2006, the FASB issued its Interpretation No. 48 Accounting for Uncertainty in
Income Taxes an interpretation of FASB Statement 109 (FIN 48). FIN 48 establishes a
single model to address accounting for uncertain tax positions. FIN 48 clarifies the
accounting for income taxes by prescribing a minimum recognition threshold a tax position is
required to meet before being recognized in the financial statements. FIN 48 also provides
guidance on derecognition, measurement, classification, interest and penalties, accounting
in interim periods, disclosure and transition. The Company is subject to the provisions of
FIN 48 as of January 1, 2007, and has analyzed its filing positions in all of the federal,
state, and international jurisdictions where it, or its wholly-owned subsidiaries, are
required to file income tax returns, as well as all open tax years in these jurisdictions.
Except for the tax years 2003 and 2004 with respect to its wholly-owned subsidiarys income
tax filings in the United Kingdom, no open periods in any jurisdiction are currently under
audit.
There was no financial statement impact from the adoption of FIN 48. As of January 1,
2007, the Company had recorded approximately $500,000 in liabilities related to unrecognized
tax benefits for uncertain income tax positions. Recognition of these tax benefits would
reduce the Companys effective tax rate. There have been no significant changes to these
amounts during the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2007. Estimated interest and
penalties are recorded as a component of interest expense and other expense, respectively.
Such amounts were not material as of January 1, 2007 and June 30, 2007.
Note 12 Geographic Segment Information
SFAS No. 131, Disclosure about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information (SFAS
131), establishes standards for reporting information about operating segments and for
related disclosures about products, services and geographic areas. Operating segments are
identified as components of an enterprise about which separate discrete financial
information is available for evaluation by the chief operating decision-maker, or
decision-making group, in making decisions regarding allocation of resources and assessing
performance. Crays chief decision-maker, as defined under SFAS 131, is the Chief Executive
Officer. The Company continues to operate in a single operating segment.
The Companys geographic operations outside the United States include sales and service
offices in Canada, Europe, the Middle East, Japan, Australia, Korea and Taiwan. The
following data presents the Companys revenue for the United States and all other countries,
which is determined based upon a customers geographic location (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States |
|
|
Other Countries |
|
|
Total |
|
Three months ended June 30, |
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Product revenue |
|
$ |
9,327 |
|
|
$ |
13,845 |
|
|
$ |
4,462 |
|
|
$ |
10,802 |
|
|
$ |
13,789 |
|
|
$ |
24,647 |
|
Service revenue |
|
|
7,824 |
|
|
|
9,971 |
|
|
|
5,012 |
|
|
|
3,895 |
|
|
|
12,836 |
|
|
|
13,866 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
17,151 |
|
|
$ |
23,816 |
|
|
$ |
9,474 |
|
|
$ |
14,697 |
|
|
$ |
26,625 |
|
|
$ |
38,513 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six months ended June 30, |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product revenue |
|
$ |
34,540 |
|
|
$ |
45,273 |
|
|
$ |
12,909 |
|
|
$ |
13,643 |
|
|
$ |
47,449 |
|
|
$ |
58,916 |
|
Service revenue |
|
|
16,428 |
|
|
|
20,435 |
|
|
|
9,857 |
|
|
|
7,677 |
|
|
|
26,285 |
|
|
|
28,112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
50,968 |
|
|
$ |
65,708 |
|
|
$ |
22,766 |
|
|
$ |
21,320 |
|
|
$ |
73,734 |
|
|
$ |
87,028 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product and service revenue from U.S. government agencies and customers primarily
serving the U.S. government totaled approximately $17.0 million and $50.3 million for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2007, compared to approximately $20.4 million and $58.5
million, respectively, for the three and six months ended June 30, 2006. Geographic product
revenue previously disclosed in Form 10-Q for the three months ended March
10
31, 2007 overstated product revenue derived from the United States and understated
product revenue derived in Other Countries by $2.0 million. Product revenue for the six
months ended June 30, 2007 has been properly reflected in the above tables.
There has been no material change in the balances of long-lived assets, except for the
impact of foreign currency translation on goodwill.
Note 13 Foreign Currency Derivative
During the first quarter of 2007, the Company entered into three separate forward
contracts for a combined total of £37.8 million (British pound sterling) and 3.5 million
(Euro) to hedge anticipated cash receipts on specific sales contracts, which are expected to
be received between the end of 2007 and 2009. At June 30, 2007, these three forward
contracts were designated as cash flow hedges. During the first quarter of 2007, prior to
one of the forward contracts designation as an effective cash flow hedge, the Company
recorded a gain of approximately $370,000 to Other income on its Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations. As of June 30, 2007, the fair value of outstanding forward
contracts totaled a loss of approximately $800,000 and unrecognized losses on the forward
contracts have been recorded to Accumulated other comprehensive income on the Companys
Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet in the amount of $1.8 million. As of June 30, 2007,
forward contracts with notional amounts of £32.8 million and 3.5 million were
outstanding.
Note 14 Subsequent Events
In July 2007 the Company entered into two forward contracts to hedge a portion of
future cash receipts from a sales contract denominated in Norwegian Kroner and value added
tax receipts denominated in British pound sterling. These forward contracts, which are
hedging foreign currency exposure of approximately $12.0 million, have been designated as
cash flow hedges.
11
Item 2. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
Preliminary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
The information set forth in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations below contains forward-looking statements that involve
risks and uncertainties, as well as assumptions that, if they never materialize or prove
incorrect, could cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or
implied by such forward-looking statements. All statements other than statements of
historical fact are statements that could be deemed forward-looking statements, including
any projections of earnings, revenue or other financial items; any statements of the plans,
strategies and objectives of management for future operations; any statements concerning
proposed new products, services or developments; any statements regarding future economic
conditions or performance; statements of belief and any statement of assumptions underlying
any of the foregoing. We assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements.
These forward-looking statements are subject to the safe harbor created by Section 27A of
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934. Factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed
or implied in the forward-looking statements are set forth in the discussion under Item 1A.
Risk Factors in Part II of this Report. The following discussion should also be read in
conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying Notes thereto in our
2006 Form 10-K and the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying Notes
thereto in this Report.
Overview and Executive Summary
We design, develop, manufacture, market and service high performance computing (HPC)
systems, commonly known as supercomputers. Our supercomputer systems provide capability,
capacity and sustained performance far beyond typical server-based computer systems and
address challenging scientific and engineering computing problems.
We believe we are well-positioned to meet the HPC markets demanding needs by providing
superior supercomputer systems with performance and cost advantages when sustained
performance on challenging applications and total cost of ownership are taken into account.
We differentiate ourselves from our competitors primarily by concentrating our research and
development efforts on the processing, interconnect and software capabilities that enable
our systems to scale that is, to continue to increase performance as our systems grow in
size. Purpose-built for the supercomputer market, our systems balance highly capable
processors, highly scalable software and very high speed interconnect and communications
capabilities.
In early 2006 we announced our Adaptive Supercomputing vision to expand the concept of
hybrid computing to a fully integrated view of both hardware and software supporting
multiple processing technologies within a single, highly scalable system. We believe that
our November 2006 $250 million award from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
(DARPA) under its High Productivity Computing Systems (HPCS) program validates our
Adaptive Supercomputing vision. This award is expected to co-fund our Cascade development project to
implement this vision.
Summary of 1st Half of 2007 Results
Total revenue for the first six months of 2007 decreased by $13.3 million or 15%
compared to the first six months of 2006 principally due to a period-over-period decrease of
nearly $18 million in revenue recognized in 2006 on low margin DARPA Phase II and Red Storm
projects.
Loss from operations was $9.0 million for the first six months of 2007 compared to a
loss from operations of $9.1 million for the same period in 2006 as improved product gross
margins and a slight decrease in operating expenses offset the lower revenue for the 2007
period.
Net cash used by operations for the first six months of 2007 was $17.1 million compared
to a use of cash of $2.2 million for the first six months of
2006 primarily due to decreases in accounts payable, accrued payroll
and related expenses and
advance research and development payments. Cash and cash equivalents,
12
restricted cash and short-term investments totaled $124.5 million and $140.3 million,
respectively, as of June 30, 2007 and December 31, 2006.
Market Overview and Challenges
In recent years the most significant trend in the HPC market has been the continuing
expansion and acceptance of low-bandwidth cluster systems using processors manufactured by
Intel, AMD, IBM and others with commercially available commodity networking and other
components throughout the HPC market, especially in capacity computing situations. These
systems may offer higher theoretical peak performance for equivalent cost, and vendors of
such systems often put pricing pressure on us in competitive procurements, even at times in
capability market procurements.
In the capability market and in large capacity procurements in the enterprise market,
the use of commodity processors, networking components and communication software is
resulting in increasing data transfer bottlenecks as these components do not balance faster
processor speeds with network communication capability. With the arrival of dual and
quad-core processors, these unbalanced systems have even lower productivity, especially in
larger systems running more complex applications, a trend that is likely to increase with
the arrival of ever larger multi-core processors in future years. In addition, with
increasing numbers of multi-core processors, large computer systems use progressively higher
amounts of power to operate and require special cooling capabilities.
We believe we are well-positioned to meet the markets demanding needs, as we
concentrate our research and development efforts on the processing, interconnect,
communication, software and packaging capabilities that enable our systems to scale that
is, to continue to increase performance as our systems, purpose built for the supercomputer
market, grow in size. Our experience and capabilities across each of these fronts are
becoming ever more important, especially in larger procurements. We expect to be in an
advantageous position as larger multi-core processors enter the market.
Nevertheless, to compete against cluster systems in the longer term, we also need to
incorporate greater performance differentiation across our products. We believe we will have
such differentiation through our new vector-based product being developed in our BlackWidow
project and our new multithreaded Cray XMT system. These products, which focus initially on
a narrower market than our commodity processor products, are expected to be generally
available in 2008. One of our challenges is to broaden the markets for these products. In
addition we must add greater performance differentiation to our high-bandwidth, massively
parallel commodity processor-based products, such as our Cray XT4, Baker and successor
systems. While increasing performance differentiation, we must balance the business
strategy trade-offs between using commodity parts, which are available to our competitors,
and proprietary components, which are both expensive and time-consuming to develop but
provide customers with higher levels of performance and capability.
Our Strategy
Our goal is to become the leading provider of supercomputers in the markets that we
target. Key elements of our strategy include:
Gain Share in Our Core HPC Market. We intend to leverage our strong product portfolio,
product roadmap and brand recognition in the high end of the HPC market to gain market
share. We believe that most of our competitors are primarily focused on the lower end of the
HPC market where low-bandwidth cluster systems dominate. We plan to remain focused on the
capability and enterprise segments of the HPC market.
Maintain Focus on Execution and Profitability. We are committed to achieving sustained
profitability on an annual basis. We intend to continue to refine our product roadmap,
converge our technologies and development processes, improve our ability to deliver high
quality products on time and on budget and continue our commitment to financial discipline.
Extend Technology Leadership. We are an innovation driven company in a technology
driven market. We plan to maintain a technology leadership position by investing in research
and development and partnering with key customers with interests aligned strongly with ours.
We will rely in part on government funding for our research and development efforts. We
intend to execute on our product roadmap and implement our Adaptive Supercomputing
13
vision to realize the concept of supporting multiple processing technologies within a
single, highly scalable Linux-based system.
Expand Total Addressable Market. Over time, we intend to leverage our technologies,
customer base and Cray brand in new segments and expand our addressable market. We believe
we have the opportunity to compete in a broader portion of the HPC market as well as
selective markets outside of HPC.
Key Performance Indicators
Our management monitors and analyzes several key performance indicators in order to
manage our business and evaluate our financial and operating performance, including:
Revenue. Product revenue generally constitutes the major portion of our revenue in any
reporting period and, for the reasons discussed elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q, is subject to significant variability from period to period. In the short term, we
closely review the status of product shipments, installations and acceptances in order to
forecast revenue and cash receipts; longer-term, we monitor the status of the pipeline of
product sales opportunities and product development cycles. Revenue growth is the best
indicator of whether we are achieving our objective of increased market share in the markets
we address. Our new products scheduled for 2007 and 2008 and our longer-term Adaptive
Supercomputing vision are efforts to increase product revenue. Service revenue is more
constant in the short run and assists, in part, to offset the impact that the variability in
product revenue has on total revenue.
Gross margins. Our total gross margin and our product gross margin for the first half
of 2007 were 36% and 33%, respectively. The high product margin in
the second quarter of 2007 was driven by
product mix across a small number of transactions. While we do not expect to consistently
achieve the second quarter product gross margin levels, to be successful, we need to achieve
product gross margins above historical levels, which we believe is best achieved through
increased product differentiation. We also monitor service margins and have been proactive
in reducing service costs where possible.
Operating expenses. Our operating expenses are driven largely by headcount, contracted
research and development services and the level of co-funded research and development. As
part of our ongoing efforts to control operating expenses, we monitor headcount levels in
specific geographic and operational areas. During 2006 we received increased levels of
co-funding for our research and development projects. Our November 2006 DARPA Phase III
award is in line with our long-term development path. This award likely will result in
increases in gross and net research and development expenditures by us in future periods due
to the size of the overall program and the cost-sharing requirement on our part. Our overall
operating expenses significantly decreased in 2006 compared to 2005, especially in research
and development. Our first half 2007 operating expenses were approximately $.5 million less
than first half 2006 levels, with higher net research and development expenses in the first
half of 2007 due to lower amounts recognized from government co-funding offset by lower
general and administrative and restructuring and severance expenses.
Liquidity and cash flows. Due to the variability in product revenue, our cash position
also varies from quarter to quarter and within a quarter. We closely monitor our expected
cash levels, particularly in light of potential increased inventory purchases for large
system installations and the risk of delays in product shipments and acceptances and,
longer-term, in product development. Our common stock offering in late 2006 was consistent
with our goal to build our cash position to provide additional working capital and to
improve our operational and strategic flexibility while at the same time lowering the
business risk to shareholders. Sustained profitability over annual periods is our primary
objective, which should improve our cash position and shareholder value.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
This discussion, as well as disclosures included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q, is based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in
accordance with GAAP. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make
estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenue and
expenses, and related disclosure of contingencies. In preparing our financial statements in
accordance with GAAP, there are certain accounting policies that are particularly important.
These include revenue
14
recognition, inventory valuation, goodwill, accounting for income taxes, accounting for
loss contracts, research and development expenses and share-based compensation. Our relevant
accounting policies are set forth in Note 3 to the Consolidated Financial Statements
included in our 2006 Form 10-K and should be reviewed in conjunction with the accompanying
condensed consolidated financial statements and notes thereto as of June 30, 2007, as they
are integral to understanding our results of operations and financial condition in this
interim period. In some cases, these policies represent required accounting. In other
cases, they may represent a choice between acceptable accounting methods or may require
substantial judgment or estimation.
Additionally, we consider certain judgments and estimates to be significant, including
those relating to the fair value determination used in revenue recognition, estimates of
proportional performance on co-funded engineering contracts, determination of inventory at
the lower of cost or market, useful lives for depreciation and amortization, determination
of future cash flows associated with impairment testing for goodwill and long-lived assets,
determination of the fair value of stock options, estimation of restructuring costs,
percentage of completion accounting on the Red Storm contract, calculation of deferred
income tax assets, potential income tax assessments and other contingencies. We base our
estimates on historical experience, current conditions and on other assumptions that we
believe to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results may differ from these
estimates and assumptions.
Our management has discussed the selection of significant accounting policies and the
effect of judgments and estimates with the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors.
Revenue Recognition
We recognize revenue when it is realized or realizable and earned. In accordance with
the Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 104, Revenue
Recognition in Financial Statements, we consider revenue realized or realizable and earned
when we have persuasive evidence of an arrangement, the product has been shipped or the
services have been provided to our customer, the sales price is fixed or determinable, no
significant unfulfilled obligations exist and collectibility is reasonably assured. We
record revenue in our Statements of Operations net of any sales, use, value added or certain
excise taxes imposed by governmental authorities on specific sales transactions. In addition
to the aforementioned general policy, the following are our statements of policy with regard
to multiple-element arrangements and specific revenue recognition policies for each major
category of revenue.
Multiple-Element Arrangements. We commonly enter into transactions that include
multiple-element arrangements, which may include any combination of hardware, maintenance
and other services. In accordance with Emerging Issues Task Force Issue No. 00-21, Revenue
Arrangements with Multiple Deliverables, when some elements are delivered prior to others in
an arrangement and all of the following criteria are met, revenue for the delivered element
is recognized upon delivery and acceptance of such item:
|
|
|
The element could be sold separately; |
|
|
|
|
The fair value of the undelivered element is established; and |
|
|
|
|
In cases with any general right of return, our performance with respect
to any undelivered element is within our control and probable. |
If all of the criteria are not met, revenue is deferred until delivery of the last
element as the elements would not be considered a separate unit of accounting and revenue
would be recognized as described below under our product or service revenue recognition
policies. We consider the maintenance period to commence upon acceptance of the product,
which may include a warranty period and accordingly allocate a portion of the sales price as
a separate deliverable which is recognized as service revenue over the entire service
period.
Products. We recognize revenue from product sales upon customer acceptance of the
system, when we have no significant unfulfilled obligations stipulated by the contract that
affect the customers final acceptance, the price is fixed or determinable and collection is
reasonably assured. A customer-signed notice of acceptance or similar document is typically
required from the customer prior to revenue recognition.
15
DARPA Phase II and Red Storm Project Revenue. Revenue from contracts that require us
to design, develop, manufacture or modify complex information technology systems to a
customers specifications is recognized using the percentage of completion method for
long-term development projects under American Institute of Certified Public Accountants
(AICPA) Statement of Position 81-1, Accounting for Performance of Construction-Type and
Certain Production-Type Contracts. Percentage of completion is measured based on the ratio
of costs incurred to date compared to the total estimated costs. Total estimated costs are
based on several factors, including estimated labor hours to complete certain tasks and the
estimated cost of purchased components or services. Estimates may need to be adjusted from
quarter to quarter, which would impact revenue and margins on a cumulative basis. To the
extent the estimate of total costs to complete the contract indicates a loss, such amount is
recognized in full in the period that the determination is made. Revenue from these
arrangements is included in Product Revenue on our accompanying Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the first six months of 2006. Funding under DARPA Phase III is
reflected as reimbursed research and development expense, and as such is deducted to arrive
at net research and development expenses as recorded on our Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Operations for the first six months of 2007.
Services. Maintenance services are provided under separate maintenance contracts with
our customers. These contracts generally provide for maintenance services for one year,
although some are for multi-year periods, often with prepayments for the term of the
contract. We consider the maintenance period to commence upon acceptance of the product,
which may include a warranty period. We allocate a portion of the sales price to maintenance
service revenue based on estimates of fair value. Revenue for the maintenance of computers
is recognized ratably over the term of the maintenance contract. Maintenance contracts that
are paid in advance are recorded as deferred revenue. We consider fiscal funding clauses as
contingencies for the recognition of revenue until the funding is virtually assured. Revenue
from Cray Technical Services is recognized as the services are rendered.
Inventory Valuation
We record our inventory at the lower of cost or market. We regularly evaluate the
technological usefulness and anticipated future demand of our inventory components. Due to
rapid changes in technology and the increasing demands of our customers, we are continually
developing new products. Additionally, during periods of product or inventory component
upgrades or transitions, we may acquire significant quantities of inventory to support
estimated current and future production and service requirements. As a result, it is
possible that older inventory items we have purchased may become obsolete, be sold below
cost or be deemed in excess of quantities required for production or service requirements.
When we determine it is not likely we will recover the cost of inventory items through
future sales, we write down the related inventory to our estimate of its market value. We
are nearing the end of the life cycle for the Cray X1E, Cray XT3 and Cray XD1 systems and
have made certain estimates of the future demand for these products. These estimates are
subject to risk in the near term and could require a write-down of inventory if the actual
demand is lower than currently estimated. Additionally, we have placed last-time buy orders
for a key inventory component for our Cray XT4 and Cray XMT systems and our BlackWidow
project and have begun to receive inventory under these orders.
Because the products we sell have high average sales prices and because a high number
of our prospective customers receive funding from U.S. or foreign governments, it is
difficult to estimate future sales of our products and the timing of such sales. It also is
difficult to determine whether the cost of our inventories will ultimately be recovered
through future sales. While we believe our inventory is stated at the lower of cost or
market and that our estimates and assumptions to determine any adjustments to the cost of
our inventories are reasonable, our estimates may prove to be inaccurate. We have sold
inventory previously reduced in part or in whole to zero, and we may have future sales of
previously written down inventory. We also may have additional expense to write down
inventory to its estimated market value. Adjustments to these estimates in the future may
materially impact our operating results.
16
Goodwill
Approximately 20% of our total assets as of June 30, 2007 consisted of goodwill
resulting from our acquisition of the Cray Research business unit assets from Silicon
Graphics, Inc. (SGI) in 2000 and our acquisition of OctigaBay Systems Corporation in April
2004. We no longer amortize goodwill associated with the acquisitions, but we are required
to conduct ongoing analyses of the recorded amount of goodwill in comparison to its
estimated fair value. We currently have one operating segment and reporting unit. As such,
we evaluate any potential goodwill impairment by comparing our net assets against the market
value of our outstanding shares of common stock. We performed an annual impairment test
effective January 1, 2007, and determined that our recorded goodwill was not impaired.
The analysis of whether the fair value of recorded goodwill is impaired and the number
and nature of our reporting units involves a substantial amount of judgment. Future charges
related to the amounts recorded for goodwill could be material depending on future
developments and changes in technology and our business.
Accounting for Income Taxes
Deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between
financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities and operating loss and tax
credit carryforwards and are measured using the enacted tax rates and laws that will be in
effect when the differences and carryforwards are expected to be recovered or settled. In
accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 109, Accounting for
Income Taxes, a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets is provided when we estimate
that it is more likely than not that all or a portion of the deferred tax assets may not be
realized through future operations. This assessment is based upon consideration of
available positive and negative evidence, which includes, among other things, our most
recent results of operations and expected future profitability. We consider our actual
historical results to have stronger weight than other more subjective indicators when
considering whether to establish or reduce a valuation allowance on deferred tax assets. As
of June 30, 2007, we had approximately $139.0 million of deferred tax assets, of which
$138.2 million was fully reserved. The net deferred tax assets were generated in foreign
jurisdictions where we believe it is more likely than not that we will realize these assets
through future operations.
On January 1, 2007, we implemented the provisions of FIN 48. FIN 48 clarifies the
accounting for uncertainty in income taxes and prescribes a recognition threshold and
measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax
position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. This adoption did not have a
material impact on our financial position.
Accounting for Loss Contracts
In accordance with our revenue recognition policy, certain production contracts are
accounted for using the percentage of completion accounting method. We recognize revenue
based on a measurement of completion comparing the ratio of costs incurred to date with
total estimated costs multiplied by the contract value. Inherent in these estimates are
uncertainties about the total cost to complete the project. If the estimate to complete
results in a loss on the contract, we will record the amount of the estimated loss in the
period the determination is made. On a regular basis, we update our estimates of total
costs. Changes to the estimate may result in a charge or benefit to operations. As of June
30, 2007, our estimate of loss on the Red Storm contract was consistent with our estimate of
such loss as of December 31, 2005 and 2006, which was a cumulative loss of $15.3 million,
all of which was recorded in prior periods.
Research and Development Expenses
Research and development costs include costs incurred in the development and production
of our hardware and software, costs incurred to enhance and support existing software
features and expenses related to future product development. Research and development costs
are expensed as incurred, and may be offset by co-funding from the U.S. government.
Amounts to be received under co-funding arrangements with the U.S. government are based
on either contractual milestones or costs incurred. These co-funding milestone payments are
recognized in operations as performance is
17
estimated to be completed and are measured as milestone achievements occur or as costs
are incurred. In 2006, certain of these co-funding payments were recognized as product
revenue. See Revenue Recognition DARPA Phase II and Red Storm Project Revenue above.
We do not record a receivable from the U.S. government prior to completing the
requirements necessary to bill for a milestone or cost reimbursement. Funding from the U.S.
government is subject to certain budget restrictions and as such, there may be periods in
which research and development costs are expensed as incurred for which no reimbursement is
recorded, as milestones have not been completed or the U.S. government has not funded an
agreement.
We classify amounts to be received from funded research and development projects as
either revenue or a reduction to research and development expense, based on the specific
facts and circumstances of the contractual arrangement, considering total costs expected to
be incurred compared to total expected funding and the nature of the research and
development contractual arrangement. In the event that a particular arrangement is
determined to represent revenue, the corresponding research and development costs are
classified as cost of revenue.
Share-based Compensation
We account for share-based compensation in accordance with the provisions of FAS 123R.
Estimates of fair value of stock options are based upon the Black-Scholes option pricing
model. We utilize assumptions related to stock price volatility, stock option term and
forfeiture rates that are based upon both historical factors as well as managements
judgment.
Results of Operations
Revenue and Gross Margins
Our revenue, cost of revenue and gross margin for the three and six months ended June
30, 2007 and 2006 were (in thousands, except for percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Product revenue |
|
$ |
13,789 |
|
|
$ |
24,647 |
|
|
$ |
47,449 |
|
|
$ |
58,916 |
|
Less: Cost of product revenue |
|
|
8,227 |
|
|
|
18,099 |
|
|
|
31,804 |
|
|
|
44,776 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product gross margin |
|
$ |
5,562 |
|
|
$ |
6,548 |
|
|
$ |
15,645 |
|
|
$ |
14,140 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Product gross margin percentage |
|
|
40 |
% |
|
|
27 |
% |
|
|
33 |
% |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service revenue |
|
$ |
12,836 |
|
|
$ |
13,866 |
|
|
$ |
26,285 |
|
|
$ |
28,112 |
|
Less: Cost of service revenue |
|
|
7,660 |
|
|
|
7,901 |
|
|
|
15,658 |
|
|
|
15,594 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service gross margin |
|
$ |
5,176 |
|
|
$ |
5,965 |
|
|
$ |
10,627 |
|
|
$ |
12,518 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Service gross margin percentage |
|
|
40 |
% |
|
|
43 |
% |
|
|
40 |
% |
|
|
45 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenue |
|
$ |
26,625 |
|
|
$ |
38,513 |
|
|
$ |
73,734 |
|
|
$ |
87,028 |
|
Less: Total cost of revenue |
|
|
15,887 |
|
|
|
26,000 |
|
|
|
47,462 |
|
|
|
60,370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross margin |
|
$ |
10,738 |
|
|
$ |
12,513 |
|
|
$ |
26,272 |
|
|
$ |
26,658 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total gross margin percentage |
|
|
40 |
% |
|
|
33 |
% |
|
|
36 |
% |
|
|
31 |
% |
18
Product revenue for the three and six months ended June 30, 2007 consisted of
$13.8 million and $47.4 million, respectively, primarily from Cray XT4 systems, Cray XT3
systems, Cray XD1 systems, Cray X1E systems and other products and no revenue in either
period from our Red Storm and DARPA Phase II development projects. Product revenue for the
three and six months ended June 30, 2006 consisted of $14.8 million and $41.1 million from
Cray XT3 systems, Cray XD1 systems, Cray X1/X1E systems and other products, and $9.9 million
and $17.8 million respectively, from our Red Storm and DARPA Phase II development projects.
While there continues to be a wide range of potential outcomes for quarterly and annual
results, we estimate total 2007 revenue likely will be below $190 million, due to a decrease
in estimated product revenue. We anticipate minimal, if any, revenue from BlackWidow or
quad-core Cray XT4 systems in 2007. For 2008, we expect improved product revenue over 2007.
Service Revenue
Service revenue for the three months ended June 30, 2007 was $12.8 million, a $1.0
million decrease from the same period in 2006 due to the termination of certain service
contracts on older systems and lower Cray Technical Services revenue. Service revenue for
the six months ended June 30, 2007 decreased $1.8 million over the same period in 2006 for
the same reasons.
While we expect our maintenance service revenue to stabilize over the next year, we may
have periodic revenue and margin declines as our older, higher margin service contracts end.
Our newer products will likely require less hardware maintenance and therefore generate less
maintenance revenue than our historic vector systems. Overall service revenue will likely
decline in 2007 from 2006 levels due to lower maintenance and Technical Service revenue.
Product Gross Margin
Product gross margin improved 13 percentage points to 40% for the three month period
ended June 30, 2007 compared to the same period in 2006 and 9 percentage points to 33% for
the six month period ended June 30, 2007 compared to the same period in 2006. These
improvements in product gross margin were due to increased margins across all product lines.
Product gross margins for both periods of 2006 were negatively impacted by low margin
development project revenue. If the effects of the low margin project revenue development
projects were excluded, adjusted product margins for the three and six month periods ended
June 30, 2006 would have been approximately 36% and 30%, respectively.
With minimal low-margin, development-related product revenue expected in 2007, we
expect overall product gross margins to increase in 2007 as compared
to 2006, although the gross margin is expected to be
lower than second quarter levels.
Service Gross Margin
Service gross margin for the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2007, was lower
than the respective 2006 periods due to lower revenue. Cost of service was comparable to
the prior year periods. Service gross margin percentage for 2007 is expected to decrease
somewhat from 2006 levels.
Research and Development Expenses
Our research and development expenses for the three and six months ended June 30, 2007
and 2006 were (in thousands, except for percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Gross research and development expenses |
|
$ |
21,652 |
|
|
$ |
26,135 |
|
|
$ |
44,183 |
|
|
$ |
52,208 |
|
Less: Amounts included in cost of product revenue |
|
|
(195 |
) |
|
|
(8,734 |
) |
|
|
(465 |
) |
|
|
(15,112 |
) |
Less: Reimbursed research and development
(excludes amounts in revenue) |
|
|
(12,598 |
) |
|
|
(11,030 |
) |
|
|
(26,979 |
) |
|
|
(23,510 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net research and development expenses |
|
$ |
8,859 |
|
|
$ |
6,371 |
|
|
$ |
16,739 |
|
|
$ |
13,586 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of total revenue |
|
|
33 |
% |
|
|
17 |
% |
|
|
23 |
% |
|
|
16 |
% |
19
Gross research and development expenses in the table above reflect all research
and development expenditures, including expenses related to our research and development
activities on the Red Storm and DARPA Phases II and III projects. Research and development
expenses on the Red Storm and DARPA Phase II projects are reflected in our Statements of
Operations as cost of product revenue, and government co-funding on our other projects,
including DARPA Phase III, is recorded in our Statements of Operations as reimbursed
research and development expense. Research and development expenses include personnel
expenses, depreciation, allocations for certain overhead expenses, software, prototype
materials and outside contracted engineering expenses.
For the three and six months ended June 30, 2007, net research and development expenses
increased as compared to the same periods in 2006 due principally to lower recognized
government co-funding offset in part by lower overall gross spending.
We anticipate 2007 net research and development expenses will be higher than 2006
levels due to lower government co-funding amounts recognized in operations. Net research
and development expenses may further increase if the U.S. government
delays, decreases or ceases to
co-fund our DARPA Phase III, BlackWidow or Cray XMT projects. Amounts recognized related to
our current research and development co-funding arrangements, including amounts under the
DARPA Phase III, BlackWidow and Cray XMT funding agreements, are recorded as a reduction to
research and development expense in 2007.
Other Operating Expenses
Our sales and marketing, general and administrative, and restructuring and severance
charges for the three months ended June 30, 2007 and 2006 were (in thousands, except for
percentages):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
June 30, |
|
June 30, |
|
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
|
2007 |
|
2006 |
Sales and marketing |
|
$ |
5,123 |
|
|
$ |
5,682 |
|
|
$ |
10,391 |
|
|
$ |
10,667 |
|
Percentage of total revenue |
|
|
19 |
% |
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
General and administrative |
|
$ |
3,822 |
|
|
$ |
4,600 |
|
|
$ |
8,102 |
|
|
$ |
10,194 |
|
Percentage of total revenue |
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
12 |
% |
Restructuring and severance |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
549 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
|
$ |
1,287 |
|
Percentage of total revenue |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
<1 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
Sales and Marketing. The decrease in expenses for both the three and six month periods
ended June 30, 2007, compared to the same periods in 2006 was primarily due to lower
commission expense. We expect that 2007 sales and marketing expenses will be somewhat lower
than 2006 levels primarily due to lower product sales offset by certain increases in
headcount.
General and Administrative. General and administrative costs for the three months
ended June 30, 2007 were $800,000 lower than the same period in 2006 primarily due to lower
variable pay and retention compensation expenses and the 2006 period being adversely
affected by a charge related to uncertainty regarding whether a foreign value added tax
receivable would be realized. The decrease in general and administrative costs for the six
months ended June 30, 2007 over the corresponding 2006 period was primarily due to the same
reasons. Additionally, the 2006 period was negatively impacted by accounting and legal
costs related to the restatement of certain 2004 financial information. We expect overall
2007 general and administrative expenses to be lower than 2006 levels.
Restructuring and Severance. Restructuring and severance charges included costs
related to our efforts to reduce our overall cost structure by reducing headcount related to
our second and fourth quarter 2005 actions.
20
Other Income (Expense), net
For the three months ended June 30, 2007, we recognized net other income of $76,000
compared to net other expense of $1.8 million for the three months ended June 30, 2006. For
the six months ended June 30, 2007, we recognized net other income of $471,000 compared to
net other expense of $1.9 million for the same period in 2006. Net other income for the six
months ended June 30, 2007 was principally the result of gains realized prior to a foreign
currency derivatives designation as an effective cash flow hedge. Net other expense for
the three and six months ended June 30, 2006 was principally the result of a loss in fair
value on a foreign currency derivative not designated as a cash flow hedge, offset in part
by net foreign currency transaction gains.
Interest Income (Expense)
Our interest income and interest expense for the three and six months ended June 30,
2007 and 2006 were (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three Months Ended |
|
|
Six Months Ended |
|
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
June 30, |
|
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
2006 |
|
Interest income |
|
$ |
1,763 |
|
|
$ |
629 |
|
|
$ |
3,598 |
|
|
$ |
1,114 |
|
Interest expense |
|
|
(797 |
) |
|
|
(1,070 |
) |
|
|
(1,599 |
) |
|
|
(2,163 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income (expense) |
|
$ |
966 |
|
|
$ |
(441 |
) |
|
$ |
1,999 |
|
|
$ |
(1,049 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income increased in the three and six months ended June 30, 2007 compared to
the same periods in 2006 as a result of higher average invested cash balances and higher
short-term interest rates.
Interest expense for both three month periods ended June 30, 2007 and 2006 principally
consisted of $600,000 of interest on our convertible notes. Additionally, we recorded
non-cash amortization of capitalized issuance costs of $172,000 and $338,000, respectively.
Interest expense for both six month periods ended June 30, 2007 and 2006 principally
consisted of $1.2 million of interest on our convertible notes and $344,000 and $676,000,
respectively, of non-cash amortization of capitalized issuance costs.
Taxes
We recorded tax expense of $360,000 and $725,000 for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2007, respectively, and $212,000 and $481,000 for the three and six months ended
June 30, 2006, respectively. The tax expense recognized in both 2007 and 2006 reflects tax
expense for local, state and foreign tax jurisdictions.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash, short-term investments and accounts
receivable totaled $149.1 million at June 30, 2007, compared to $185.1 million at December
31, 2006; cash and cash equivalents and restricted cash decreased by $67.0 million while
short-term investments increased by $51.2 million and accounts receivable decreased by $20.2
million. At June 30, 2007, we had working capital of $132.8 million compared to $136.3
million at December 31, 2006.
Net cash used in operating activities for the six months ended June 30, 2007 was $17.1
million compared to $2.2 million for the same period in 2006. For the six months ended June
30, 2007, cash used by operating activities was principally the result of our net loss for
the period, an increase in inventory and decreases in deferred revenue and advance research
and development payments, partially offset by a decrease in accounts receivable. For the six
months ended June 30, 2006, cash used by operating activities was principally the result of
our net loss for the period, an increase in inventory and decrease in deferred revenue,
partially offset by a decrease in accounts receivable and an increase in accounts payable.
Net cash used in investing activities was $51.4 million for the six months ended June
30, 2007, compared to $1.2 million for the respective 2006 period. Net cash used by
investing activities for the six months ended June 30, 2007 was due principally to the
purchase of short-term investments, net of their sales or maturities, and purchases of
21
property and equipment. Net cash used by investing activities for the six months ended
June 30, 2006 consisted primarily of purchases of property and equipment.
Net cash provided by financing activities was $1.5 million for the six months ended
June 30, 2007, compared to $734,000 for the respective 2006 period. Cash provided by
financing activities for both periods was primarily cash received from the exercise of stock
options and the issuance of common stock through our employee stock purchase plan. In 2006,
these proceeds were offset by line of credit issuance costs and principal payments on
capital leases.
Over the next twelve months, our significant cash requirements will relate to
operational expenses, consisting primarily of personnel costs, costs of inventory and spare
parts, outside engineering expenses, particularly as we continue development of our Cray XT4
and successor systems and internally fund a portion of the expenses on our Cascade project
pursuant to the DARPA Phase III award, interest expense and acquisition of property and
equipment. As of June 30, 2007, our remaining fiscal year 2007 capital budget for property
and equipment was approximately $9 million. In addition, we lease certain equipment used in
our operations under operating or capital leases in the normal course of business.
We have $80.0 million of outstanding Convertible Senior Subordinated Notes (Notes)
which are due in 2024. These Notes bear interest at 3.0% ($2.4 million per year, or $600,000
on a quarterly basis) and holders of these Notes may require us to purchase these Notes on
December 1, 2009, December 1, 2014 and December 1, 2019, or upon the occurrence of certain
events provided in the indenture governing the Notes. Additionally, we have a two-year
cash-secured revolving line of credit for up to $25.0 million, which expires in December
2008. No amounts were outstanding under this line as of June 30, 2007. As of the same date,
we were eligible to borrow $19.9 million against this line of credit; the borrowing
limitation relates to restrictions from an outstanding letter of credit. We are required to
maintain $25 million of restricted cash in connection with our line of credit agreement.
In our normal course of operations, we have development arrangements under which we
engage outside engineering resources to work on our research and development projects. For
the three and six month periods ended June 30, 2007, we incurred $3.7 million and $7.8
million, respectively, for such arrangements, and for the three and six month periods ended
June 30, 2006, we incurred $6.9 million and $13.9 million, respectively, for such
arrangements.
At any particular time, our cash position is affected by the timing of cash receipts
for product sales, maintenance contracts, government co-funding for research and development
activities and our payments for inventory, resulting in significant fluctuations in our cash
balance from quarter-to-quarter and within a quarter. Our principal sources of liquidity are
our cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments, operations and credit facility. Even
assuming acceptances and payment for large new systems to be sold and the benefit from our
restructuring activities and other recent cost reduction efforts, our cash flow from
operations is likely to be negative for 2007 as a whole, largely to support working capital
requirements, although a wide range of results is possible. With the proceeds of our
December 2006 public offering, and the near term expected cash flow from our DARPA Phase III
award, we do not anticipate borrowing from our credit line and we expect our cash resources
to be adequate for at least the next twelve months.
We have been focusing on expense controls, negotiating sales contracts with advance
partial payments where possible, implementing tighter purchasing and manufacturing processes
and improving working capital management in order to maintain adequate levels of cash.
Additionally, the adequacy of our cash resources is dependent on the amount and timing of
government funding as well as our ability to sell our products, particularly the Cray XT4,
BlackWidow and Cray XMT systems, with adequate margins. Beyond the next twelve months, the
adequacy of our cash resources will largely depend on our success in re-establishing
profitable operations and positive operating cash flows on a sustained basis. See Item 1A.
Risk Factors in Part II below.
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
We are exposed to financial market risks, including changes in interest rates and foreign
currency fluctuations.
22
Interest Rate Risk: We invest our available cash in investment-grade debt instruments
of corporate issuers and in debt instruments of the U.S. government and its agencies. We do
not have any derivative instruments in our investment portfolio. We protect and preserve
invested funds by limiting default, market and reinvestment risk. Investments in both
fixed-rate and floating-rate interest earning instruments carry a degree of interest rate
risk. Fixed-rate securities may have their fair market value adversely affected due to a
rise in interest rates, while floating-rate securities may produce less income than expected
if interest rates fall. Due in part to these factors, our future investment income may fall
short of expectations due to changes in interest rates or we may suffer losses in principal
if forced to sell securities, which have declined in market value due to changes in interest
rates. At June 30, 2007, we held a portfolio of highly liquid investments, all of which were
to mature in less than 90 days from the date of initial investment.
Foreign Currency Risk: We sell our products primarily in North America, Asia and
Europe. As a result, our financial results could be affected by factors such as changes in
foreign currency exchange rates or weak economic conditions in foreign markets. Our products
are generally priced in U.S. dollars, and a strengthening of the dollar could make our
products less competitive in foreign markets. While we commonly sell products with payments
in U.S. dollars, our product sales contracts may call for payment in foreign currencies and
to the extent we do so, or engage with our foreign subsidiaries in transactions deemed to be
short-term in nature, we are subject to foreign currency exchange risks. As of June 30,
2007, we have entered into three separate forward exchange contracts with notional amounts
totaling £32.8 million (British pound sterling) and 3.5 million (Euro) to hedge
anticipated cash receipts on specific sales contracts against the risk of foreign exchange
rate changes between the time that the related contracts were signed and when the cash
receipts are expected to be received. Our foreign maintenance contracts are paid in local
currencies and provide a natural hedge against foreign exchange exposure. To the extent that
we wish to repatriate any of these funds to the United States, however, we are subject to
foreign exchange risks. As of June 30, 2007, a 10% change in foreign exchange rates could
impact our annual earnings and cash flows by approximately $1.2 million.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of disclosure controls and procedures. Under the supervision and with the
participation of our senior management, including our chief executive officer and chief
financial officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and
operation of our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as of the end of the period covered by
this quarterly report. Based on this evaluation, our chief executive officer and chief
financial officer concluded as of June 30, 2007 that our disclosure controls and procedures
were effective such that the information required to be disclosed in our Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) reports (i) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported
within the time periods specified in SEC rules and forms, and (ii) is accumulated and
communicated to our management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial
officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
Changes in internal control over financial reporting. There have been no changes in our
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended June 30,
2007 that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect our
internal control over financial reporting.
Item 4T. Controls and Procedures
Not applicable.
PART II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1A. Risk Factors
The following factors should be considered in evaluating our business, operations,
prospects and common stock as they may affect our future results and financial condition and
they may affect an investment in our securities.
23
Our operating results may fluctuate significantly and we may not achieve profitability
in any given period. Our operating results are subject to significant fluctuations due to
the factors listed below, which make estimating revenue and operating results for any
specific period very difficult, particularly as the product revenue recognized in any given
quarter may depend on a very limited number of system sales planned for that quarter, the
timing of product acceptances by customers and contractual provisions affecting revenue
recognition. For example, we expect that two large revenue transactions will constitute a
substantial majority of our product revenue in the second half of 2007, either or both of
which could be accepted and recognized in the third or fourth quarter. Delays in recognizing
revenue from any transaction due to development delays, not receiving needed components
timely, not achieving product acceptances, contractual provisions or for other reasons,
could have a material adverse effect on our operating results in any quarter, and could
shift associated revenue, margin and cash receipts into a subsequent quarter or fiscal year.
We have experienced net losses in recent periods. For example, in 2005 we had a net
loss of $64.3 million and in 2006 we had a net loss of $12.1 million, with net losses in the
first three quarters of the year offsetting net income in the fourth quarter; for the first
six months of 2007, we had a net loss of $7.2 million.
Whether we will be able to increase our revenue and achieve and sustain profitability
on a quarterly and annual basis depends on a number of factors, including:
|
|
|
successfully selling the Cray XT4 system, including upgrades and
successor systems, and new products based on our BlackWidow project and Cray
XMT system, and the timing and funding of government purchases, especially
in the United States; |
|
|
|
|
the level of revenue recognized in any given period, particularly with
very high average sales prices and limited number of system sales in any
quarter, the timing of product acceptances by customers and contractual
provisions affecting the timing and amount of revenue recognition; |
|
|
|
|
our expense levels, including research and development net of government
funding, which is affected by the level and timing of such funding; |
|
|
|
|
maintaining our product development projects on schedule and within
budgetary limitations; |
|
|
|
|
the level of product margin contribution in any given period due to
product mix, strategic transactions, product life cycle and component costs; |
|
|
|
|
the level and timing of maintenance contract renewals with existing
customers; |
|
|
|
|
revenue delays or losses due to customers postponing purchases to wait
for future upgraded or new systems, delays in delivery of upgraded or new
systems and longer than expected customer acceptance cycles; |
|
|
|
|
the terms and conditions of sale or lease for our products; and |
|
|
|
|
the impact of expensing our share-based compensation under FAS 123R. |
The timing of orders and shipments impacts our quarterly and annual results and is
affected by events outside our control, such as:
|
|
|
the timely availability of acceptable components in sufficient quantities
to meet customer delivery schedules; |
|
|
|
|
the timing and level of government funding for product acquisitions and
research and development contracts; |
|
|
|
|
the availability of adequate customer facilities to install and operate new Cray systems; |
|
|
|
|
general economic trends, including changes in levels of customer capital spending; |
24
|
|
|
the introduction or announcement of competitive products; |
|
|
|
|
currency fluctuations, international conflicts or economic crises; and |
|
|
|
|
the receipt and timing of necessary export licenses. |
Because of the numerous factors affecting our revenue and results of operations, we
cannot assure our investors that we will have net income on a quarterly or annual basis in
the future. We anticipate that our quarterly results will vary significantly, and include
losses. Delays in product development, receipt of orders or product acceptances has had and
could continue to have a substantial adverse effect on our quarterly and full year results
in 2007 and in future years.
Failure to sell Cray XT4 systems in planned quantities and at expected gross margins
could adversely affect revenue and operating results in 2007 and future periods. We expect
that a substantial majority of our product revenue in 2007 will come from a limited number
of sales of Cray XT4 systems in the United States and overseas. We shipped the first Cray
XT4 system in November 2006, and we received the first customer acceptance of a Cray XT4
system in the first quarter of 2007. While we expect to build quad-core Cray XT4 systems
late in the fourth quarter of 2007, we expect that revenue from those transactions will not
be recognized until 2008. The delays in delivery of the quad-core Cray XT4 system have
adversely impacted our expected 2007 operating results, and any additional delays will
impact future operating results. We also face significant margin pressure for our Cray XT4
system from competitors. If we do not sell these systems in planned quantities and at
expected margins, our revenue and operating results would be adversely affected.
In order to command higher margins, we need increased product differentiation from our
competitors in our Cray XT4 and future Baker massively parallel products. The market for
such products is large but is replete with low bandwidth cluster systems offered by larger
competitors with significant resources and smaller companies with minimal research and
development expenditures. Potential customers may be able to meet their computing needs
through the use of such systems, and are willing to accept lower capability and/or less
accurate modeling in return for lower acquisition costs. Vendors of such systems, because
they can offer high peak performance per dollar, put pricing pressure on us in certain
competitive procurements. Our long-term success may be adversely affected if we are not
successful in demonstrating the value of our balanced high bandwidth systems with the
capability of solving challenging problems quickly to a market beyond our core of customers,
largely certain agencies of the U.S. and other governments, that require systems with the
performance and features we offer.
Our inability to complete the development of our BlackWidow and Cray XMT supercomputer
systems has adversely affected our revenue and operating results in 2007 and may affect our
operating results in future periods. Our 2007 plan initially contemplated product revenue
and gross margin from sales of our BlackWidow and our Cray XMT systems. These systems are
still in development and, with required respins of integrated circuits for both of these
products, we do not expect initial deliveries of the BlackWidow system until late 2007, with
minimal anticipated revenue, if any, to be recognized in 2007, and initial deliveries of the
Cray XMT system until 2008. These hardware and software development efforts are lengthy and
technically challenging processes. We may incur additional delays in successfully completing
the design and production of these hardware components, including several custom integrated
circuits and network components; in detecting and correcting, if possible, design errors in
such integrated circuits and components; and/or in developing requisite system software,
integrating and stabilizing the full systems. Any of these delays could result in additional
delays in the availability of the BlackWidow and/or the Cray XMT systems. The delays in the
BlackWidow and Cray XMT system development have adversely impacted our expected 2007
operating results. Delays in product availability of initial systems can impact future
revenue as anticipated follow-on purchases of these systems may be reduced or delayed.
Our reliance on third-party suppliers poses significant risks to our business and
prospects. We subcontract the manufacture of a majority of the hardware components for all
of our products, including integrated circuits, printed circuit boards, connectors, cables,
power supplies and memory parts, on a sole or limited source basis to third-party suppliers.
We use contract manufacturers to assemble our components for all of our systems. We also
rely on third parties to supply key capabilities, such as file systems and storage
subsystems. We use key service providers to co-develop key technologies, including
integrated circuit design and verification. We are subject to substantial risks because of
our reliance on limited or sole source suppliers. For example:
25
|
|
|
if a supplier does not provide components that meet our specifications in
sufficient quantities on time, then production and sales of our systems
would be delayed, adversely affecting revenue and cash flow these risks
are accentuated during steep production ramp periods as we introduce new or
successor products; |
|
|
|
|
if an interruption of supply of our components occurs, because of a
significant problem with a supplier providing parts that later prove to be
defective or because a single-source supplier imposes allocations on its
customers, decides to no longer provide those components to us or increases
the price of those parts significantly, it could take us a considerable
period of time to identify and qualify alternative suppliers, to redesign
our products as necessary and to begin manufacture of the redesigned
components. In some cases, we may not be able to redesign such components.
Defective components may need to be replaced, which may result in increased
costs and obsolete inventory. See also the Risk Factor captioned, Last-time
buy decisions affecting our products may adversely affect our revenue and
operating results, below; |
|
|
|
|
if a supplier provides us with software or other intellectual property
that contains bugs or other errors or is different from what we expected,
our development projects may be adversely affected through additional design
testing and verification efforts and respins of integrated circuits; |
|
|
|
|
if a supplier providing us with key research and development services
with respect to integrated circuit design, network communication
capabilities or internal software is late, fails to provide us with
effective designs or products or loses key internal talent, our development
programs may be delayed or prove to be not possible to complete; |
|
|
|
|
if a supplier cannot provide a competitive key component, our systems may
be less competitive than systems using components with greater capability; |
|
|
|
|
some of our key component and service suppliers are small companies with
limited financial and other resources, and consequently may be more likely
to experience financial and operational difficulties than larger,
well-established companies; and |
|
|
|
|
if a supplier is acquired or has a significant business change,
production and sales of our systems may be delayed or our development
programs may be delayed or may not be possible to complete. |
To the extent that Intel, IBM or other processor suppliers develop processors with
greater capabilities, even for a short time, our systems, including upgrades and successor
products, may be at a competitive disadvantage to systems utilizing such other processors.
Our Cray XT4 and Baker systems are based on certain Opteron processors from AMD while our
BlackWidow system is based on custom integrated circuits manufactured for us by Texas
Instruments, Inc., and our Cray XMT system is based on custom integrated circuits
manufactured for us by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company. If any of our integrated
circuit suppliers suffers delays or cancels the development of enhancements to its
processors, our product revenue would be adversely affected. Changing our product designs to
utilize another suppliers integrated circuits would be a costly and time-consuming process.
Our products must meet demanding specifications. For example, integrated circuits must
perform reliably at high frequencies to meet acceptance criteria. From time to time during
the last three years, we incurred significant delays in the receipt of key components which
delayed product shipments and acceptances. The delays in product shipments and acceptances
adversely affected revenue and margins in those years, including 2007, and, to the extent
that we experience similar problems in the future, such delays may adversely affect future
revenue and margins.
If we lose government support for development of our supercomputer systems, our net
research and development expenditures and capital requirements would increase and our
ability to conduct research and development would decrease. A few government agencies and
research laboratories fund a significant portion of our development efforts, including our
Cascade project through the DARPA HPCS program and our BlackWidow and Cray XMT projects
through other agencies; this combined funding significantly reduces our reported level of
net research and development expenses. The DARPA program calls for the delivery of prototype
systems by late 2010, and provides for a contribution by DARPA to us of up to $250 million
payable over approximately four years, assuming we meet ten milestones, of which to date we
have met two. If we do not meet any of the remaining milestones, our cash flows would be
adversely impacted and our product development programs would be at risk. DARPAs future
financial commitments are subject to subsequent Congressional and federal inter-agency
action,
26
and our Cascade development efforts and the level of reported research and development
expenses would be adversely impacted if DARPA did not receive expected funding, delayed
payment for completed milestones, delayed the timing of milestones or decided to terminate
the program before completion. We have incurred some delays in payments and program
milestones by DARPA this year and additional delays are possible. We must contribute at
least $125 million towards the projects total development cost; failure to do so would
result in a lower level of DARPA contribution and could result in a termination of the
contract. The DARPA program likely will result in increased net research and development
expenditures by us for the cost-sharing portion of the program and adversely affect our cash
flow, particularly in the later years of the program. We require additional funding for our
BlackWidow program to complete the current contract, which ends on September 30, 2007, and
additional funding and a contract extension for development work
on our BlackWidow program after September 30, 2007;
for the Cray XMT system, we require additional funding and a contract extension for
development work after December 31, 2007. Future funding and contract extensions for these
projects may be at risk, especially given the development delays we have encountered on both
of these projects.
Agencies of the U.S. government historically have facilitated the development of, and
have constituted a market for, new and enhanced very high performance computer systems. U.S.
government agencies may delay or decrease funding of our future product development efforts
due to product development delays, a change of priorities, international political
developments, overall budgetary considerations or other reasons. Any delay, decrease or
cessation of governmental support would cause an increased need for capital, increase
significantly our research and development expenditures and adversely impact our operating
results and our ability to implement our product roadmap.
Failure to overcome the technical challenges of completing the development of our
supercomputer systems on our product roadmap would adversely affect our revenue and
operating results in subsequent years. In addition to developing the BlackWidow system and scalable system software for quad-core Cray XT4 systems for
general availability, we continue work on our product roadmap,
including the Cray XMT system for 2008 deliveries, the Baker project as the successor to the
Cray XT4 system for 2009 deliveries, our Granite project to combine our vector and
multithreaded architectures with our scalar systems, and our Cascade program under the DARPA
HPCS Phase III award to implement our Adaptive Supercomputing vision in subsequent years.
These hardware and software development efforts are lengthy and technically challenging
processes, and require a significant investment of capital, engineering and other resources.
Our engineering and technical personnel resources are limited. Unanticipated performance
and/or development issues may require more engineers, time or testing resources than are
currently available. Engineering resources directed to solving current issues may adversely
affect the timely development of successor or future products. Given the breadth of our
engineering challenges and our limited resources, we periodically review the anticipated
contributions and expense of our product programs to determine their long-term viability. We
may not be successful in meeting our development schedules for technical reasons and/or
because of insufficient hardware and software engineering resources, which could cause a
lack of confidence in our capabilities among our key customers. To the extent we incur
delays in completing the design, development and production of hardware components, delays
in development of requisite system software, cancellation of programs due to technical
infeasibility or uncover stability issues, whether for software or hardware, our revenue,
results of operations and cash flows, and the reputation of such systems in the market could
be adversely affected. Future sales of our products may be adversely affected by any of
these factors. We have suffered significantly from product delays in the past that adversely
affected our financial performance, and we continue to incur some stability issues typical
of new large installations. We previously announced development delays for both our
BlackWidow project and Cray XMT system. If Baker is not available in
sufficient volume in 2009, our results in that year could be
significantly impacted. We may incur additional development delays and
stability issues in 2007 and subsequent years in any or all of our key development projects,
which would adversely affect our revenue and operating results in those periods.
If the U.S. government purchases fewer supercomputers, our revenue would be reduced and
our operating results would be adversely affected. Historically, sales to the U.S.
government and customers primarily serving the U.S. government have represented a
significant market for supercomputers, including our products. From January 1, 2001, through
December 31, 2003, approximately 81% of our aggregate product revenue was derived from sales
to various agencies of the U.S. government; in 2004, 2005, 2006 and the first six months of
2007, approximately 81%, 55%, 45% and 78%, respectively, of our product revenue was derived
from such sales. Our 2007 and future plans contemplate significant sales to U.S. government
agencies. Sales to government agencies, including cancellations of existing contracts, may
be affected by factors outside our control, such as changes in
27
procurement policies, budgetary considerations, domestic crises, and international
political developments. If agencies and departments of the United States or other
governments were to stop, reduce or delay their use and purchases of supercomputers, our
revenue and operating results would be adversely affected.
The achievement of our business plan is highly dependent on increased product revenue
and margins. Product revenue in recent years has been adversely affected by delays in
product shipments due to development delays, including system software development for large
systems, and at times by the availability of key components from third-party vendors. System
stability issues typical of new large systems previously have affected the timing of system
acceptances, which adversely affects our revenue, results of operations and cash flows. In
the past, product margins have been adversely impacted by competitive pressures, lower
volumes than planned and higher than anticipated manufacturing variances, including scrap,
rework and excess and obsolete inventory. We sometimes do not meet all of the contract
requirements for customer acceptance of our systems, which has resulted in contract
penalties. Most often these penalties adversely affect the gross margin on a sale through
the provision of additional equipment and services to satisfy delivery delays and
performance shortfalls, although there is the risk of contract defaults and product return.
The risk of contract penalties is increased when we bid for new business prior to completing
development of new products when we must estimate future system performance. To improve our
financial performance, we need to limit negative manufacturing variances, contract penalties
and other charges that adversely affect product margin.
Last-time buy decisions affecting our products may adversely affect our revenue and
operating results. We placed a last-time buy order in the first quarter of 2007 for a key
component for our Cray XT4 and Cray XMT systems and face a last-time buy decision for high
capacity memory parts for our Cray XMT system in the second half of 2007. Such last-time buy
orders and inventory purchases must be placed before we can know all possible sales
prospects for these products. In determining last-time buy orders and inventory purchases,
we either may have estimated too low, in which case we limit the number of possible sales of
products and reduce potential revenue, perhaps substantially, or we may estimate too high,
and may incur inventory obsolescence charges. Either way, our operating results could be
adversely affected. These last-time buy decisions adversely impact short-term cash flow and
increase inventory because the items are paid for well in advance of customer revenue. For
example, since September 2006 we have placed orders for approximately $7.7 million of
certain components for which we expect delivery in 2007 but do not expect to sell the major
part of the products containing these components until sometime in 2008.
If we are unable to compete successfully in the HPC market, our revenue will decline.
The performance of our products may not be competitive with the computer systems offered by
our competitors. Many of our competitors are established companies well known in the HPC
market, including IBM, NEC, Hewlett-Packard, SGI, Dell, Bull S.A. and Sun Microsystems. Most
of these competitors have substantially greater research, engineering, manufacturing,
marketing and financial resources than we do. We also compete with systems builders and
resellers of systems that are constructed from commodity components using processors
manufactured by Intel, AMD, IBM and others. These competitors include the previously named
companies as well as smaller firms that benefit from the low research and development costs
needed to assemble systems from commercially available commodity products. These companies
have capitalized on developments in parallel processing and increased computer performance
in commodity-based networking and cluster systems. While these companies products are more
limited in applicability and scalability, they have achieved growing market acceptance. They
offer significant peak/price performance on larger problems lacking complexity. Such
companies, because they can offer high peak performance per dollar, can put pricing pressure
on us in certain competitive procurements. In addition, to the extent that Intel, IBM and
other processor suppliers develop processors with greater capabilities than the processors
we use from AMD, our Cray XT4 systems and successor products may be at a competitive
disadvantage to systems utilizing such other processors.
Periodic announcements by our competitors of new HPC systems or plans for future
systems and price adjustments may reduce customer demand for our products. Many of our
potential customers already own or lease very high performance computer systems. Some of our
competitors may offer trade-in allowances or substantial discounts to potential customers,
and engage in other aggressive pricing tactics, and we have not always been able to match
these sales incentives. We have in the past and may again be required to provide substantial
discounts to make strategic sales, which may reduce or eliminate any positive margin on such
transactions, or to provide lease
28
financing for our products, which could result in a deferral of our receipt of cash and
revenue for these systems. These developments limit our revenue and resources and reduce our
ability to be profitable.
Our market is characterized by rapidly changing technology, accelerated product
obsolescence and continuously evolving industry standards. Our success depends upon our
ability to sell our current products, and to develop successor systems and enhancements in a
timely manner to meet evolving customer requirements, which may be influenced by competitive
offerings. We may not succeed in these efforts. Even if we succeed, products or technologies
developed by others may render our products or technologies noncompetitive or obsolete. A
breakthrough in technology could make low bandwidth cluster systems even more attractive to
our existing and potential customers. Such a breakthrough would impair our ability to sell
our products and would reduce our revenue and operating results.
If we cannot retain, attract and motivate key personnel, we may be unable to
effectively implement our business plan. Our success also depends in large part upon our
ability to retain, attract and motivate highly skilled management, technical, marketing,
sales and service personnel. The loss of and failure to replace key engineering management
and personnel could adversely affect multiple development efforts. Recruitment and retention
of senior management and skilled technical, sales and other personnel is very competitive,
and we may not be successful in either attracting or retaining such personnel. As part of
our strategy to attract and retain key personnel, we may offer equity compensation through
stock options and restricted stock grants. However, potential employees may not perceive our
equity incentives as attractive, and current employees who have significant options with
exercise prices significantly above current market values for our common stock may seek
other employment. In addition, due to the intense competition for qualified employees, we
may be required to increase the level of compensation paid to existing and new employees,
which could materially increase our operating expenses.
Lower than anticipated sales of new supercomputers and the termination of maintenance
contracts on older and/or decommissioned systems may reduce our service revenue and margins
from maintenance service contracts. Our HPC systems are typically sold with maintenance
service contracts. These contracts generally are for annual periods, although some are for
multi-year periods, and provide a predictable revenue base. Our revenue from maintenance
service contracts declined from approximately $95 million in 2000 to approximately $42
million in 2005 while increasing to approximately $50 million in 2006. We expect that 2007
maintenance service revenue to decline from this level. We may have periodic revenue and
margin declines as our older, higher margin service contracts are ended and newer, lower
margin contracts are established, based on the timing of system withdrawals from service.
Adding service personnel to new locations when we win contracts where we have previously had
no presence and servicing installed products if we discover defective components in the
field create additional pressure on service margins.
Expansion of our Technical Services efforts could reduce our service margins. We plan
to expand our capabilities to deliver Cray Technical Services in 2007 through the addition
of experienced managers and personnel and marketing of these services. These services
usually are rendered on a project-by-project basis. To the extent that we incur additional
expenses in this effort prior to receiving additional revenue, our service margins will be
adversely affected.
Our stock price is volatile. The trading price of our common stock is subject to
significant fluctuations in response to many factors, including our quarterly operating
results (particularly if they are less than our or analysts previous estimates), changes in
analysts estimates, our capital raising activities, announcements of technological
innovations by us or our competitors and general conditions in our industry.
The adoption of FAS 123R has and will continue to adversely affect our operating
results and may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Beginning in 2006, in
light of the adoption of FAS 123R, we awarded option and stock awards to a limited number of
new employees and granted options and restricted stock to less than a majority of employees,
generally with four-year vesting periods. We also changed the purchase price under our
employee stock purchase plan in order to designate the plan as non-compensatory, and thereby
avoid expense which would have otherwise been incurred under FAS 123R. We recorded
approximately $2.0 million as non-cash compensation expense in the first six months of 2007
and $2.1 million for all of 2006 for stock options and restricted stock grants, and we
anticipate that this amount will increase in future years. Our estimates are based on the
Black-Scholes valuation method, which provides significantly different values depending on
certain
29
assumptions. We do not know how analysts and investors will react to the additional
expense recorded in our statements of operations rather than disclosed in the notes thereto,
and thus such additional expense may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
We may infringe or be subject to claims that we infringe the intellectual property
rights of others. Third parties in the past have asserted, and may in the future assert
intellectual property infringement claims against us, and such future claims, if proved,
could require us to pay substantial damages or to redesign our existing products or pay fees
to obtain cross-license agreements. Regardless of the merits, any claim of infringement
would require management attention and could be expensive to defend.
U.S. export controls could hinder our ability to make sales to foreign customers and
our future prospects. The U.S. government regulates the export of HPC systems such as our
products. Occasionally we have experienced delays for up to several months in receiving
appropriate approvals necessary for certain sales, which have delayed the shipment of our
products. Delay or denial in the granting of any required licenses could make it more
difficult to make sales to foreign customers, eliminating an important source of potential
revenue.
We incorporate software licensed from third parties into the operating systems for our
products and any significant interruption in the availability of these third-party software
products or defects in these products could reduce the demand for our products. The
operating system software we develop for our HPC systems contains components that are
licensed to us under open source software licenses. Our business could be disrupted if
this software, or functional equivalents of this software, were either no longer available
to us or no longer offered to us on commercially reasonable terms. In either case we would
be required to redesign our operating system software to function with alternate third-party
software, or develop these components ourselves, which would result in increased costs and
could result in delays in product shipments. Furthermore, we might be forced to limit the
features available in our current or future operating system software offerings. Our Cray
XT4 and successor systems utilize software system variants that incorporate Linux
technology. The SCO Group, Inc. has filed and threatened to file lawsuits against companies
that operate Linux for commercial purposes, alleging that such use of Linux infringes its
rights. The open source licenses under which we have obtained certain components of our
operating system software may not be enforceable. Any ruling by a court that these licenses
are not enforceable, or that Linux-based operating systems, or significant portions of them,
may not be copied, modified or distributed as provided in those licenses, would adversely
affect our ability to sell our systems. In addition, as a result of concerns about this
litigation and open source software generally, we may be forced to protect our customers
from potential claims of infringement. In any such event, our financial condition and
results of operations may be adversely affected.
We also incorporate proprietary software from third parties, such as for file systems,
job scheduling and storage subsystems. We have experienced some functional issues in the
past with implementing such software with our supercomputer systems. These issues, if
repeated, may result in additional expense by us in integrating this software more fully
and/or loss of customer confidence.
We are required to evaluate our internal control over financial reporting under Section
404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 at the end of each fiscal year, and any adverse
results from such future evaluations could result in a loss of investor confidence in our
financial reports and have an adverse effect on our stock price. Pursuant to Section 404 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we are required to furnish a report by our management and
our independent registered public accounting firm on our internal control over financial
reporting in our Annual Reports on Form 10-K. We received favorable opinions from our
independent registered public accounting firm and we reported no material weaknesses for
2005 and 2006; for 2004, however, we reported material weaknesses and received a disclaimed
attestation report. Each year, we must continue to monitor and assess our internal control
over financial reporting and determine whether we have any material weaknesses. Depending on
their nature and severity, any future material weaknesses could result in our having to
restate financial statements, could make it difficult or impossible for us to obtain an
audit of our annual financial statements or could result in a qualification of any such
audit. In such events, we could experience a number of adverse consequences, including our
inability to comply with applicable reporting and listing requirements, a loss of market
confidence in our publicly available information, delisting from the Nasdaq Global Market,
loss of financing sources such as our line of credit, and litigation based on the events
themselves or their consequences.
Our indebtedness may adversely affect our financial strength. In December 2004 we sold
$80.0 million in aggregate principal amount of our 3.0% Convertible Senior Subordinated
Notes due 2024 (the Notes). Holders
30
may require us to purchase all or a part of their Notes for cash at a purchase price of
100% of the principal amount of the Notes plus accrued and unpaid interest on December 1,
2009, December 1, 2014 or December 1, 2019, or upon the occurrence of certain events
provided in the indenture governing the Notes. As of June 30, 2007, we had no other
outstanding indebtedness for money borrowed and no material equipment lease obligations. We
have a $25.0 million cash secured credit facility which supports the issuance of letters of
credit and forward currency contracts. As of June 30, 2007, we had approximately $19.9
million available to borrow under this credit facility. Our current credit facility
constitutes senior debt with respect to the Notes. We may incur additional indebtedness for
money borrowed, which may include borrowing under new credit facilities or the issuance of
new debt securities. Over time, the level of our indebtedness could, among other things:
|
|
|
increase our vulnerability to general economic and industry conditions,
including recessions; |
|
|
|
|
require us to use cash from operations to service our indebtedness,
thereby reducing our ability to fund working capital, capital expenditures,
research and development efforts and other expenses; |
|
|
|
|
limit our flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in our
business, including merger and acquisition opportunities; |
|
|
|
|
place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to competitors that have
less indebtedness; and |
|
|
|
|
limit our ability to borrow additional funds that may be needed to
operate and expand our business. |
We may not have the funds necessary to purchase the Notes upon a fundamental change or
other purchase date and our ability to purchase the Notes in such events may be limited. On
December 1, 2009, December 1, 2014 or December 1, 2019, holders of the Notes may require us
to purchase their Notes for cash. In addition, holders may also require us to purchase their
Notes upon a fundamental change, as defined in the indenture governing the Notes, which
includes among other matters a change of control. Our ability to repurchase the Notes in
such events may be limited by law and by the terms of other indebtedness, including the
terms of senior indebtedness, we may have outstanding at the time of such events. While our
existing credit facility does not prohibit us from repurchasing any of the Notes, any
subsequent credit facility may include such a covenant or a requirement for prior written
consent from the lender. If we do not have sufficient funds, we will not be able to
repurchase the Notes tendered to us for purchase. If a repurchase event occurs, we may
require third-party financing to repurchase the Notes, but we may not be able to obtain that
financing on favorable terms or at all. Our failure to repurchase tendered Notes at a time
when the repurchase is required by the indenture would constitute a default under the
indenture. In addition, a default under the indenture would constitute a default under our
existing senior secured credit facility and could lead to defaults under other existing and
future agreements governing our indebtedness. In these circumstances, the subordination
provisions in the indenture governing the Notes may limit or prohibit payments to Note
holders. If, due to a default, the repayment of the related indebtedness were to be
accelerated after any applicable notice or grace periods, we may not have sufficient funds
to repay the indebtedness or repurchase the Notes.
We will require a significant amount of cash to repay our indebtedness and to fund
planned capital expenditures, research and development efforts and other corporate expenses.
Our ability to make payments on our indebtedness, including the potential repurchase of the
Notes in December 2009, and to fund planned capital expenditures, research and development
efforts and other corporate expenses will depend on our future operating performance and on
economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors. Many of these
factors are beyond our control. Our business may not generate sufficient cash from
operations and future borrowings may not be available to us in an amount sufficient to
enable us to pay our indebtedness, including the Notes, or to fund our other needs. If we
are unable to generate sufficient cash to enable us to pay our indebtedness, we may need to
pursue one or more alternatives, such as reducing our operating expenses, reducing or
delaying capital expenditures or research and development, selling assets, raising
additional equity capital and/or debt, and seeking legal protection from our creditors.
New environmental rules in Europe and other jurisdictions may adversely affect our
operations. In 2006 members of the European Union (EU) and certain other European
countries have begun implementing the Restrictions on Hazardous Substances (RoHS)
Directive, which prohibits or limits the use in electrical and electronic equipment of the
following substances: lead, mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, polybrominated
31
biphenyls, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers. After July 1, 2006, a company shipping
products that do not comply with RoHS to the EU or such other European countries could have
its products detained and could be subject to penalties. We did not ship any Cray X1E or
Cray XD1 systems to Europe after July 1, 2006, because of these restrictions. We believe we
are RoHS-compliant with our Cray XT4 system which began shipping in the fourth quarter of
2006 and our BlackWidow and Cray XMT systems which we may ship to EU members in 2008. If a
regulatory authority determines that one of our products is not RoHS-compliant, we will have
to redesign and requalify certain components to meet RoHS requirements, which could result
in increased engineering expenses, shipment delays, penalties and possible product
detentions or seizures.
A separate EU Directive on Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) was
scheduled to become effective in August 2005, but many EU member states have delayed its
implementation. Under the WEEE Directive, companies that put electrical and electronic
equipment on the EU market must register with individual member states, mark their products,
submit annual reports, provide recyclers with information about product recycling, and
either recycle their products or participate in or fund mandatory recycling schemes. In
addition, some EU member states require recycling fees to be paid in advance to ensure funds
are available for product recycling at the end of the products useful life or
de-installation. We have begun to mark our products as required by the WEEE Directive and
are registering with those EU member states where our products are sold. Each EU member
state is responsible for implementing the WEEE Directive and some member states have not yet
established WEEE registrars or established or endorsed the recycling schemes required by the
WEEE Directive. We are monitoring implementation of the WEEE Directive by the member states.
Compliance with the WEEE Directive could increase our costs and any failure to comply with
the WEEE Directive could lead to monetary penalties.
Other jurisdictions are considering adoption of rules similar to the RoHS and WEEE
regulations. To the extent that any such rules differ from the RoHS and WEEE regulations,
they may result in additional expense for us to redesign and requalify our products, and may
delay us from shipping products into such jurisdictions.
We may not be able to protect our proprietary information and rights adequately. We
rely on a combination of patent, copyright and trade secret protection, nondisclosure
agreements and licensing arrangements to establish, protect and enforce our proprietary
information and rights. We have a number of patents and have additional applications
pending. There can be no assurance, however, that patents will be issued from the pending
applications or that any issued patents will protect adequately those aspects of our
technology to which such patents will relate. Despite our efforts to safeguard and maintain
our proprietary rights, we cannot be certain that we will succeed in doing so or that our
competitors will not independently develop or patent technologies that are substantially
equivalent or superior to our technologies. The laws of some countries do not protect
intellectual property rights to the same extent or in the same manner as do the laws of the
United States. Additionally, under certain conditions, the U.S. government might obtain
non-exclusive rights to certain of our intellectual property. Although we continue to
implement protective measures and intend to defend our proprietary rights vigorously, these
efforts may not be successful.
A substantial number of our shares are eligible for future sale and may depress the
market price of our common stock and may hinder our ability to obtain additional financing.
As of June 30, 2007, we had outstanding:
|
|
|
32,547,950 shares of common stock; |
|
|
|
|
1,284,852 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of warrants; |
|
|
|
|
3,604,846 shares of common stock issuable upon exercise of options, of
which options to purchase 2,884,535 shares of common stock were then
exercisable; and |
|
|
|
|
Notes convertible into an aggregate of 4,144,008 shares of common stock
or, under certain circumstances specified in the indenture governing the
Notes, a maximum of 5,698,006 shares of common stock. |
Almost all of our outstanding shares of common stock may be sold without substantial
restrictions, with certain exceptions including 384,781 shares held by Board members,
executive officers and key managers that may be forfeited and are restricted against
transfer until vested.
32
Almost all of the shares of common stock that may be issued on exercise of the warrants
and options will be available for sale in the public market when issued, subject in some
cases to volume and other limitations. The warrants outstanding at June 30, 2007, consisted
of warrants to purchase 1,284,852 shares of common stock, with an exercise price of $10.12
per share, expiring on June 21, 2009. The Notes are not now convertible, and only become
convertible upon the occurrence of certain events specified in the indenture governing the
Notes. Sales in the public market of substantial amounts of our common stock, including
sales of common stock issuable upon the exercise or conversion of warrants, options and
Notes, may depress prevailing market prices for the common stock. Even the perception that
sales could occur may impact market prices adversely. The existence of outstanding warrants,
options and Notes may prove to be a hindrance to our future financings. Further, the holders
of warrants, options and Notes may exercise or convert them for shares of common stock at a
time when we would otherwise be able to obtain additional equity capital on terms more
favorable to us. Such factors could impair our ability to meet our capital needs. We also
have authorized 5,000,000 shares of undesignated preferred stock, although no shares of
preferred stock currently are outstanding.
Provisions of our Restated Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws could make a proposed
acquisition that is not approved by our Board of Directors more difficult. Provisions of
our Restated Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws could make it more difficult for a third
party to acquire us. These provisions could limit the price that investors might be willing
to pay in the future for our common stock. For example, our Restated Articles of
Incorporation and Bylaws provide for:
|
|
|
removal of a director only in limited circumstances and only upon the
affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of the shares entitled to vote
to elect directors; |
|
|
|
|
the ability of our board of directors to issue preferred stock, without
shareholder approval, with rights senior to those of the common stock; |
|
|
|
|
no cumulative voting of shares; |
|
|
|
|
the right of shareholders to call a special meeting of the shareholders
only upon demand by the holders of not less than 30% of the shares entitled
to vote at such a meeting; |
|
|
|
|
the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of the outstanding
shares entitled to vote on an amendment, unless the amendment was approved
by a majority of our continuing directors, who are defined as directors who
have either served as a director since August 31, 1995, or were nominated to
be a director by the continuing directors; |
|
|
|
|
special voting requirements for mergers and other business combinations,
unless the proposed transaction was approved by a majority of continuing
directors; |
|
|
|
|
special procedures to bring matters before our shareholders at our annual
shareholders meeting; and |
|
|
|
|
special procedures to nominate members for election to our board of
directors. |
These provisions could delay, defer or prevent a merger, consolidation, takeover or
other business transaction between us and a third party that is not approved by our Board of
Directors.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
Our annual meeting of shareholders was held on May 16, 2007. At the annual meeting, the
following individuals were re-elected as directors for terms expiring in 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Votes For |
|
% For |
|
Withheld |
|
% Withheld |
William C. Blake |
|
|
29,743,386 |
|
|
|
98.51 |
% |
|
|
448,680 |
|
|
|
1.49 |
% |
John B. Jones, Jr. |
|
|
29,452,404 |
|
|
|
97.55 |
% |
|
|
739,662 |
|
|
|
2.45 |
% |
Stephen C. Kiely |
|
|
29,450,280 |
|
|
|
97.54 |
% |
|
|
741,786 |
|
|
|
2.46 |
% |
Frank L. Lederman |
|
|
29,196,509 |
|
|
|
96.70 |
% |
|
|
995,557 |
|
|
|
3.30 |
% |
Sally G. Narodick |
|
|
28,476,917 |
|
|
|
94.32 |
% |
|
|
1,715,149 |
|
|
|
5.68 |
% |
Daniel C. Regis |
|
|
28,736,982 |
|
|
|
95.18 |
% |
|
|
1,455,084 |
|
|
|
4.82 |
% |
Stephen C. Richards |
|
|
28,795,658 |
|
|
|
95.37 |
% |
|
|
1,396,408 |
|
|
|
4.63 |
% |
Peter J. Ungaro |
|
|
29,730,679 |
|
|
|
98.47 |
% |
|
|
461,387 |
|
|
|
1.53 |
% |
33
Item 6. Exhibits
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Amendment No. 2, dated as of March 30, 2007, to the Technology Agreement, dated
March 31, 2000 between Silicon Graphics, Inc. and the Company |
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
Certificate pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
Items 1, 2, 3 and 5 of Part II are not applicable and have been omitted.
34
SIGNATURES
In accordance with the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly
authorized.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CRAY INC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 7, 2007
|
|
/s/ PETER J. UNGARO
Peter J. Ungaro
|
|
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer and President |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ BRIAN C. HENRY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brian C. Henry |
|
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/s/ KENNETH D. ROSELLI |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Kenneth D. Roselli |
|
|
|
|
Chief Accounting Officer |
|
|
35